Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
January 22, 2024
Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Members of the public may observe the meeting proceedings by viewing the livestream. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the City’s website following the meeting. Page 1. Call to Order/Roll Call 2. Moment of Reflection Mayor Ashe will call for a silent moment of reflection. 3. Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ashe will read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 4. Disclosure of Interest 5. Adoption of Minutes Council Minutes, December 11, 2023 1 (Confidential In Camera Council Minutes, December 11, 2023, provided under separate cover) Executive Committee Minutes, January 8, 2024 28 Special Council Minutes, January 8, 2024 33 (Confidential In Camera Special Council Minutes, January 8, 2024, provided under separate cover) 6. Presentations 7. Question Period 8. Delegations Members of the public looking to provide a verbal delegation to Members of Council may do so either in person, or through a virtual connection into the meeting. For more information, and to register as a delegate, visit www.pickering.ca/delegation, and complete the online delegation form or email clerks@pickering.ca. The list of delegates who have registered to speak will be called upon one by one by the Chair in the order in which they have registered. A maximum of 5 minutes shall be allotted for each delegation. Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Please be advised that your name will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 8.1 Clint Scott, PARA Marine Search and Rescue (In Person) Re: PARA Marine Search and Rescue’s 2024 Annual Report and Strategic Plan 8.2 Eileen Higdon, Pickering Resident (In Person) Re: Concerns regarding the City’s Procedure By-law 8.3 Darshan Sritharan, Pickering Rotary Club (In Person) Re: Fee Waiver Request for Pickering Ribfest 9. Correspondence 9.1 Corr. 01-24 40 Alexander Harras, Director of Legislative Services & Regional Clerk, The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Request the Government of Ontario to provide core funding for organizations providing programs, care, and services for adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder as part of the 2024 Provincial Budget Recommendation: That Corr. 01-24, from Alexander Harras, Director of Legislative Services & Regional Clerk, The Regional Municipality of Durham, dated December 20, 2023, regarding a Request for the Government of Ontario to provide core funding for organizations providing programs, care, and services for adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder as part of the 2024 Provincial Budget, be endorsed. 9.2 Corr. 02-24 43 The Township of Alnwick/Haldimand Re: Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 02-24 from The Township of Alnwick/Haldimand, regarding Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, dated November 28, 2023 be received and endorsed; Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 2. That the Provincial Government be requested to rescind Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022; and, 3. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable Premier Doug Ford, the Honourable Paul Calandra, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Durham Region MPP’s, the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham, and all lower tier Durham Region municipalities. 9.3 Corr. 03-24 44 The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Re: Policy Update – Social and Economic Prosperity Review Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 03-24, from The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), dated January 10, 2024, regarding a Social and Economic Prosperity Review be received; and, 2. That The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, be advised that the City of Pickering, at its meeting held on January 22, 2024 adopted the following: Whereas current provincial-municipal fiscal arrangements are undermining Ontario’s economic prosperity and quality of life; And Whereas nearly a third of municipal spending in Ontario is for services in areas of provincial responsibility and expenditures are outpacing provincial contributions by nearly $4 billion a year; And Whereas municipal revenues, such as property taxes, do not grow with the economy or inflation; And Whereas unprecedented population and housing growth will require significant investments in municipal infrastructure; And Whereas municipalities are being asked to take on complex health and social challenges – like homelessness, supporting asylum seekers and addressing the mental health and addictions crises; Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca And Whereas inflation, rising interest rates, and provincial policy decisions are sharply constraining municipal fiscal capacity; And Whereas property taxpayers – including people on fixed incomes and small businesses – can’t afford to subsidize income re-distribution programs for those most in need; And Whereas the province can, and should, invest more in the prosperity of communities; And Whereas municipalities and the provincial government have a strong history of collaboration; Now therefore be it resolved that The Corporation of the City of Pickering calls on the Province of Ontario to commit to undertaking with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, a comprehensive social and economic prosperity review to promote the stability and sustainability of municipal finances across Ontario; and, 3.That a copy of this resolution be sent to the Honourable Paul Calandra, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Region of Durham and alllower tier Durham Region municipalities. 9.4 Corr. 04-24 62 Joe Ingino, Editor/Publisher, Oshawa/Durham Central Newspapers Re: Clarification on What Must be Published under Section 270(1)(4) of the Municipal Act Recommendation: 1.That Corr. 04-24, from Joe Ingino, Editor/Publisher,Oshawa/Durham Central Newspaper, dated January 1, 2024 be received, and, 2.That the Oshawa/Durham Central Newspaper provide City Staff with documentation to demonstrate when its circulation meets the level of readership of the Toronto Star, in the City of Pickering, so Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca that it can be considered for use as the local newspaper for the City of Pickering to communicate public notices and messaging, as required under legislation or City Policy. 10.Report EC 01-24 of the Executive Committee held onJanuary 8, 2024 Refer to Executive Committee Agenda pages: 10.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 01-24 1 Part IV Designation of 301 Kingston Road This item was referred back to staff at the Executive Committee Meeting held on January 8, 2024. 10.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 02-24 11 Tree Protection By-law Update Response to Council Resolution #333/23 on Report PLN 37-23 (the Phase 3 Recommendation Report) Recommendation: 1.That Council approve the new modernized Tree Protection By-law,as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 02-24; 2.That Council approve an amendment to the General MunicipalFees & Charges By-law 6191/03, as amended, as set out inAppendix II, to implement the modernized Tree Protection By-law;and, 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given authority totake the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 11.New and Unfinished Business 11.1 Director, Operations, Report OPS 02-24 63 Facilities Renewal Study Recommendation: Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 1. That Report OPS 02-24 regarding the City of Pickering Facilities Renewal Study prepared by PSD Citywide Inc., dated January 2024 be endorsed in principle; 2. That recommendations of Report OPS 02-24 and the Facilities Renewal Study be considered, along with other municipal priorities, through future annual municipal plans and budget process; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 11.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 03-24 136 Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services - RFP-2023-22 Recommendation: 1. That proposal for Request for Proposal No. RFP-2023-22, submitted by John G. Williams Limited, Architect, to undertake Urban Design Review Services for three years commencing February 1, 2024, and expiring December 31, 2026 be accepted; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take such actions as necessary to give effect to this report. 12. Motions and Notice of Motions 12.1 Additional Dwelling Units Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt WHEREAS, all levels of Government recognize the lack of affordable housing; And Whereas, the Province of Ontario has implemented as-of-right legislation permitting a maximum of 2 Additional Dwelling Units that can be constructed on most residential properties; Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca And Whereas, such construction must adhere to Regulations under the Ontario Building Code; And Whereas, the costs for infrastructure and building materials to meet these regulations will make these units unattainable and unaffordable; And Whereas, such costs would include, water, sanitary, heating, and electricity; Now therefore be it resolved, that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering directs: 1. That the Federal and Provincial Governments be requested to introduce additional measures that will provide financial support to those property owners who construct code compliant Additional Dwelling Units to be used for affordable rental units; 2. That all applicable public utilities, (inclusive of Elexicon Energy, Enbridge, Durham Region Works Department) be requested to waive the costs of hook up for those property owners who construct code compliant Additional Dwelling Units to be used for affordable rental units; and, 3. That a copy of this resolution be sent to The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Jennifer O’Connell, MP Pickering-Uxbridge, The Honourable Premier Doug Ford, The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP Pickering-Uxbridge and Minister of Finance, all Durham Region MPs and MPPs, Indrani Butany-DeSouza, CEO, Elexicon Energy, Enbridge Gas Inc., Durham Region, and all lower tier Durham Municipalities for endorsement. 12.2 Remembrance Poppy Sidewalk Marker – Esplanade Park North Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Nagy WHEREAS, the Cenotaph for the City of Pickering is located in Esplanade Park; Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca And Whereas, each November the City honours and recognizes our fallen soldiers through all the many wars from World War 1 to present armed conflicts; And Whereas, the addition of a simplified poppy sidewalk marker at or around Esplanade Park North, is another way residents can reflect, honour and remember our fallen soldiers on Remembrance Day, as well as at other times of the year; Now therefore be it resolved, that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering directs through the Office of the CAO: 1. That notwithstanding CUL 130 Public Art Policy, that staff consult with the Royal Canadian Legion Branch #606 on the suitability, design, and material to be used for a poppy sidewalk marker which is to be funded from the Public Art Reserve (8038); and, 2. That staff report back to Council no later than the end of Q2 2024 on the most suitable location and design, to facilitate installation in time for Remembrance Day 2024. 12.3 2024 Provincial Budget Funding Request for Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Pickles WHEREAS, the bulk of government funded programs for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) end at age eighteen in the Province of Ontario; And Whereas, families supporting a loved one with ASD are often forced to make the difficult decision between expensive private day programs and leaving the workforce to provide care; And Whereas, getting out of the home and connecting with others can alleviate social isolation, improve mental and physical health, and lead to an overall better quality of life; And Whereas, Autism Home Base, based in Bowmanville, provides weekly drop-in supports and services at the McLean Community Centre in Ajax, Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca for 191 Durham Region families, or more than 450 participants, five days a week; And Whereas, Footprints 4 Autism, based at Dunbarton-Fairport United Church in Pickering, provides respite and social programs for youth and adults up to the age of twenty-one; And Whereas, by supporting programs for adults with ASD, the Government of Ontario can achieve its goal of keeping patients healthy in their communities and out of hospitals, as noted in the Ministry of Health’s 2022-2023 Strategic Plan; Now therefore be it resolved, that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering requests: 1. That the Government of Ontario provide core funding for organizations providing programs, care, and services for adults with ASD, including organizations that serve Pickering residents such as Footprints 4 Autism and Autism Home Base, as part of the 2024 Provincial Budget; and, 2. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to The Honourable Premier Doug Ford, The Honourable Sylvia Jones, Minister of Health, The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, Minister of Finance, The Honourable Michael Tibollo, Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, all Durham Region MPPs, all lower tier Durham municipalities, local school boards, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Autism Ontario, Autism Home Base and Footprints 4 Autism. 13. By-laws 13.1 By-law 8073/24 Being a by-law to prohibit and regulate the injuring, destruction or removal of trees in the City of Pickering. [Refer to Item 4.2 Report PLN 02-24, page 11 of the Executive Committee Agenda] 13.2 By-law 8074/24 Council Meeting Agenda January 22, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Being a by-law to amend By-law 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees. [Refer to Item 4.2 Report PLN 02-24, page 11 of the Executive Committee Agenda] 13.3 By-law 8075/24 141 Being a by-law to exempt Blocks 69 to 74, Plan 40M-2664, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. 13.4 By-law 8076/24 144 Being a by-law to exempt Block 117, Plan 40M-2632, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. 13.5 By-law 8077/24 147 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 24 to 26, 29, 36 to 44, 47 to 51, 59 to 62, 65, 68 to 70, 73 to 75, 80 to 82, 84, 90 to 92, 94 to 100, 104 to 106 and 128 and Blocks 159, 162, 163, 164, 175, 180, 181, 183 and 185 173, Plan 40M-2671, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. 14. Regional Councillor Updates 15. Other Business 16. Confirmatory By-law 17. Adjournment Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 1 Present: Mayor Kevin Ashe Councillors: M. Brenner S. Butt L. CookM. NagyD. Pickles L. Robinson Also Present: M. Carpino -Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley -Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni -Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor S. Boyd -Fire Chief B. Duffield -Director, Operations R. Holborn -Director, Engineering Services L. Arshad -Manager, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski -Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel -City Clerk K. Hayes -Manager, Facilities Maintenance F. Patel -Strategic Initiatives & Corporate Priorities Advisor J. San Antonio -Senior Advisor, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion C.Redmond -(Acting) Deputy Clerk A. MacGillivray -Committee Coordinator 1.Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating in- person. 2.Moment of Reflection Mayor Ashe called for a silent moment of reflection. 3.Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ashe read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 4.Disclosure of Interest - 1 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 2 Councillor Pickles declared a conflict of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to Item 14.1, Re: City of Pickering’s Offer pertaining to the Attempted Purchase of Frenchman’s Bay, on the basis of the possible involvement of an organization he is affiliated with. Councillor Pickles did not take part in the discussion or vote on this matter. 5.Adoption of Minutes Resolution #354/23 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner Council Minutes, November 27, 2023 Executive Committee Minutes, December 4, 2023 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, December 4, 2023 Carried 6.Presentations There were no presentations. 7.Question Period There were no questions posed by members of the public during Question Period. 8.Delegations 8.1 Mike Garvey, Pickering Pickleball ClubRe: Report ENG 16-23 Dedicated Outdoor Pickleball Court Options – South Pickering Mike Garvey, Pickering Pickleball Club, appeared before Council to express his concerns regarding Report ENG 16-23. Mr. Garvey advised that at the May 23, 2023 Council Meeting, his request to Council to convert one of the seven tennis club courts to a pickleball court, was denied, but that he was encouraged when a motion was passed in June asking staff to investigate alternate locations. Mr. Garvey expressed his disappointment in the Report regarding the timelines being premature due to the ongoing status of investigation and studies and the recommendation for design and construction in 2025. Mr. Garvey acknowledged that the Club does have access to a court at the Amberlea Tennis Club, but that - 2 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 3 demand for the sport will continue to grow alongside the growth of south Pickering and the Seaton community. Mr Garvey advised that he is a staunch supporter of sports and other recreational activities and does not begrudge the City for spending money on other activities, but that it seemed that other sports were taking precedence over pickleball. Mr. Garvey advised that he had been engaging with staff and Council regarding the need for pickleball courts since 2020. He commented that he would like to know if other under-utilized spaces in Pickering had been investigated. Mr. Garvey provided an overview of the Club’s statistics, including drop-in play, learn to play, skills development, ladder development, demographics, and the club’s charity endeavours. He noted that although there was more awareness from Council and staff on the need for more pickleball courts, he was disappointed on the prospects for outdoor courts. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff and Mr. Garvey regarding: •whether the club would be comfortable with a short-term solution toaddress the immediate need for outdoor pickleball space while a more permanent solution was investigated; •whether the club would consider pickleball nets with four inch by four inchwooden poles instead of metal poles at Diana, Princess of Wales Park orVillage East Park; •whether the club would be satisfied to move forward with a partial solutionfor outdoor courts in 2024 with implementation in 2025; •clarification on the number of club members that reside in Pickering; •clarification that the Hydro One site was not suitable because metal is notpermitted at the location; •confirmation that the City had not abandoned the Petticoat Creek option; and, •the outdoor pickleball courts proposed for Dave Ryan Park and BeechlawnPark that were slated for construction in 2024; 8.2 Judy Hamilton, Wildav International Developments Limited William Friedman, Wildav International Developments Limited Re: Report LEG 07-23 Expropriation of Easement at Tribute (Liverpool) Inc. Site -Walnut Lane Extension -Part Lot 23, Concession 1, Northwest corner of Liverpool Road and Highway 401 Judy Hamilton and William Friedman, Wildav International Developments Limited joined the Meeting via electronic connection to express their concern regarding Report LEG 07-23. Mr. Friedman advised that Wildav International Developments Ltd. was the owner of the easement intended to be expropriated on this site. He - 3 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 4 advised that they had concerns regarding the expropriation including the necessity. He commented that he understood that a verbal agreement had been reached between Wildav and the City of Pickering and wondered whether anyone was aware of a pending agreement. He advised that if there was an agreement, they would not oppose the termination of the easement, but if there was not an agreement, there was no necessity for the expropriation. Ms. Hamilton commented that it was premature to proceed with the expropriation process without dealing with the land over which the easement runs. 9.Correspondence 9.1 Corr. 37-23The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Re: Policy Update - Social and Economic Prosperity Review A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •clarification on what was being endorsed in the AMO correspondence; •implications of the current spending and specific elements outlined in thecorrespondence; •the funding of the services listed in the policy update and the level of government that was responsible for such funding; •obtaining information from the Region of Durham regarding the lack offunding from the provincial and federal governments with respect to thefunding for social programs; •what the City’s commitment would be should the City not meet the criteriaoutlined in the policy update; •a discussion on the extension of the Region of Durham’s Reaching Home Agreement and that without the available funding from the provincial and federal governments, the Region would not be in a position to maintain itscommitment under the agreement; •clarification that the City does not fund these programs and the responsibility of the Upper Tier; and, •clarification on how much the Region of Durham’s subsidizes its socialprograms. Councillor Brenner, as a Member of the Regional Health and Social Services Committee, stated that he had information that he would provide to all Members of Council on this matter. Resolution #355/23 Moved by Councillor Butt - 4 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 5 Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1.That Corr. 37-23, from the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), dated October 18, 2023, regarding Policy Update - Social and Economic Prosperity Review, be received and endorsed; and, 2.That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable PremierDoug Ford, the Honourable Paul Calandra, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, Member of Provincial Parliament, Pickering-Uxbridge. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe No: Councillor Robinson 10.Report EC 09-23 of the Executive Committee held on December 4, 2023 10.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report BLD 01-23Building By-law Amendments under the Building Code Act Council Decision: 1.That BLD 01-23 regarding Building By-law Amendments under theBuilding Code be received for information; 2.That the City’s Building By-law 7362/14, as amended, which provides forthe administration and enforcement of the Building Code Act, 1992 within the City of Pickering, be repealed, and that the new City Building By-law,as set out in Attachment #1 to Report BLD 01-23, be approved, finalized,and forwarded to Council for enactment; and, 3.That City officials be authorized to undertake the necessary actions to give effect to Council’s decision. 10.4 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 33-23 City Property Naming - 5 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 6 Doubles Squash Courts Council Decision: 1.That Council approve to name the doubles squash courts at the ChestnutHill Developments Recreation Complex, the Ian Parsons Doubles SquashCourts; and, 2.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.5 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 34-23 Civic Awards Policy -Repeal of By-law Council Decision: 1.That Report CS 34-23 regarding the Civic Awards Policy be received; 2.That Council approve CUL 150, Civic Awards Policy, as set out inAttachment #1 to this Report; 3.That the By-law included in Attachment #4 to this Report be enacted to repeal By-law #1448/82, a By-law establishing the Civic Recognition Committee; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take thenecessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.6 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 35-23 Animal Poisoning Prevention −Pest Management Policy −Rodenticides Education Campaign Council Decision: 1.That Report CS 35-23 regarding Animal Poisoning Prevention be received; 2.That Council approve CUL 160 Pest Management Policy, as set out inAttachment 1 to this report; - 6 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 7 3.That Council approve the Rodenticides Educational Campaign as set outin Attachment 2 to this report; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.8 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 14-23 Proposed Community Safety Zone Extension Rosebank Road – Toynevale Road to Maitland Drive Council Decision: 1.That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “14” to By- law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of Community Safety Zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation ofthe City of Pickering to extend the south limit of the Community SafetyZone on Rosebank Road from Dahlia Crescent/Cowan Circle to MaitlandDrive; and, 2.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to takethe necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.9 Director, Engineering Services, ENG 15-23 Detail Design for Sixth Concession Road Reconstruction and Bridge Rehabilitation Project −Request for Proposal No. RFP2023-17 Council Decision: 1.That Request for Proposal No. RFP2023-17, submitted by The GreerGalloway Group Inc., for the Detail Design of Sixth Concession RoadReconstruction and Bridge Rehabilitation in the amount of $371,147.37 (HST included), be accepted; 2.That the total gross project cost of $415,685.00 (HST included), includingthe fee amount, and other associated costs, and the total net project costof $374,337.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance thetotal net project cost of $374,337.00 as follows: - 7 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 8 a)the sum of $225,000.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Roads &Bridges Reserve Fund as approved in the 2017 and 2018 CapitalBudgets; b)the additional sum of $149,337.00 to be funded by a transfer from theRate Stabilization Reserve to cover the remaining over expenditure;and, 4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.11 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 19-23 2022 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Council Decision: It is recommended that Report FIN 19-23 from the Director, Finance & Treasurer regarding the 2022 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund be received for information. 10.12 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 20-23 2024 Interim Levy and Interim Tax Instalment Due Dates Council Decision: 1.That an interim property tax levy be adopted for all realty property classesfor 2024; 2.That the interim property tax levy instalment due dates be February 26 and April 26, 2024; 3.That the attached draft By-law, providing for the imposition of the taxes, beenacted; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take thenecessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.13 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 21-23 2024 Interim Spending Authority Council Decision: - 8 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 9 1.That the 2024 Interim Operating Expenditures be approved at 50 percentof the prior year’s budget, including adjustments, as contained inAttachment 1, pending approval of the formal 2024 Current Budget by Council; and, 2.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take thenecessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.14 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 22-23 2024 Temporary Borrowing By-law Council Decision: 1.That the temporary borrowing limit of $66 million be established to meet 2024 current expenditures pending receipt of taxes and other revenues forthe period of January 1 to September 30, 2024 inclusive, and $33 millionthereafter until December 31, 2024; 2.That the temporary borrowing limit for capital purposes for 2024 be established at $73 million; 3.That the attached draft By-law providing for the temporary borrowing ofmonies be enacted; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take thenecessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.15 Director, Operations, Report OPS 34-23 Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay −Results of 2023 Pilot Project Council Decision: That Report OPS 34-23 regarding Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay be received for information. 10.16 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 38-23 Streamlining the Development Application Review Process −RFP 2023-4 Council Decision: - 9 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 10 1.That proposal for Request for Proposal No. RFP 2023-4 submitted byDillon Consulting Limited, for the Streamlining the DevelopmentApplication Review Process, in the amount of $214,669.00 (excluding HST), be accepted; 2.That the net project cost of $218,447.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 3.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the net project cost of $218,447.00 for these consulting services in the amount from the Approved 2023 Current Budget from Property Taxes; and, 4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to takesuch actions as are necessary to give effect to this Report. 10.17 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 42-23 Heritage Property Tax Relief Program By-law Council Decision: 1.That the Heritage Property Tax Relief Program and By-law be approved,as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 42-23, and be enacted by Council; 2.That Council delegates the Director, City Development & CBO to execute the Heritage Easement Agreement for Eligible Properties as described in the Heritage Property Tax Relief Program By-law; 3.That the City Clerk give notice of this by-law to the Ministry of Finance andthe Region of Durham within 30 days of the passing of the by-law; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to takeactions as necessary to implement the recommendations of this report. Resolution #356/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt That Report EC 09-23 of the Executive Committee Meeting held on December 4, 2023 be adopted, save and except Items 10.1, LEG 06-23, 10.3, CS 32-23, 10.7, CS 36-23, and 10.10, ENG 16-23. Carried - 10 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 11 10.1 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report LEG 06-23 The Corporation of the City of Pickering – Corporate Strategic Plan A brief discussion ensued regarding a request for an amendment to the Corporate Strategic Plan at the December 4, 2023 Executive Committee Meeting to recognize that Indigenous people have unique status and rights, and the City’s commitment in furthering its efforts of Indigenous engagement and Truth & Reconciliation. Resolution #357/23 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councilor Nagy 1.That Council endorse 2024-2028 Corporate Strategic Plan, as set out inAttachment 1 to LEG 01-23, save and except that the following be addedto the end of the Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) Commitment on pg 5of the Strategic Plan: The City also recognizes that Indigenous people have unique status andrights, and the City is committed to furthering its efforts of Indigenousengagement and Truth & Reconciliation; 2.That staff be directed to develop an operational plan to establish how the Corporate Strategic Plan will guide the City’s operations on an ongoingbasis; 3.That the work plans for each Department shall be consistent with the operational plan, and incorporate the actions set out in the Corporate Strategic Plan, with those actions being reflected in the annual current andcapital budgets of the City on an ongoing basis; 4.That staff be directed to report annually to Council on the progress of the Corporate Strategic Plan; and, 5.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take theactions necessary to implement the Recommendations in this Report. Carried 10.3 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 32-23 Interim Program Space in Seaton Update Seaton Commercial Plaza (Taunton Road and Peter Matthews) - 11 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 12 A brief discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: the anticipated timing on the construction and opening of the Seaton commercial plaza. Resolution #358/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Council Butt 1.That Report CS 32-23, regarding Interim Program Space in SeatonUpdate, be received; 2.That staff be directed to continue discussions with the ownership group of the Seaton Commercial Plaza at Taunton Road and Peter Matthews Driveto negotiate lease terms for commercial space, and report back to Councilin Q2, 2024; and 3.That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as outlined in this report. Carried 10.7 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 36-23 Highway Traffic Act Amendments −Community Safety and Well-Being Committee Detailed discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •clarification of possible traffic safety and privacy issues as a result of theinstallation of additional Automated Speed Enforcement cameras; •clarification regarding the Community Safety and Well-Being Committee’s recommendation contained in the Report; •whether staff had investigated other traffic calming measures other thanAutomated Speed Enforcement; •whether staff had collected data using Automated Speed Enforcement andif it was a deterrent to speeding; •clarification that Automated Speed Enforcement was introduced to address situations where Durham Regional Police Services were not able to have officers on site; •whether traffic safety had improved since the introduction of AutomatedSpeed Enforcement; •clarification about the criteria and placement of Automated SpeedEnforcement cameras; - 12 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 13 •clarification that Automated Speed Enforcement cameras must be placedin community safety zones and school zones, and that the establishment of community safety zones due to traffic or safety needs could be approved at the discretion of Council; •clarification regarding the experience of the Community Safety and Well-Being Committee membership; and, •clarification if the Road Watch Committee had been engaged in thedrafting of the Report. Resolution #359/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt 1.That Report CS 36-23, regarding Highway Traffic Act Amendments, Community Safety and Well-Being be received; 2.That further to the recommendation of the Community Safety and Well-Being Committee, that Council be requested to send a letter to the OntarioMinister of Transportation and the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing requesting an amendment to the Highway Traffic Act s.205.1, to allow municipalities to locate a temporary Automated Speed Enforcementsystem on any roadway under the jurisdiction of the municipality, asdetermined by the municipality, and not restricted to only community safetyzone and school safety zones; and, 3.That the letter be copied to the local area Minister of Provincial Parliament,the Association of Municipalities in Ontario, and all Durham Region areamunicipalities. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councill Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe No: Councillor Robinson 10.10 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 16-23 Dedicated Outdoor Pickleball Court Options - 13 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 14 Marisa Carpino advised that staff had prepared a brief presentation outlining plans for the current and forecasted outdoor and indoor pickleball courts in Pickering. Richard Holborn, Director, Engineering Services, through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, provided details and a location map of the existing and proposed outdoor pickleball courts as a supplement to Report ENG 16-23. Kevin Hayes, Manager, Facilities Maintenance provided an overview of the current and future pickleball programming at City facilities including the Pickering Soccer Centre. Mr. Hayes also provided details on indoor pickleball space at City facilities planned for 2024-2028, including warehouse space. Marisa Carpino, Chief Administrative Officer, provided an update on the flooring surface at the Pickering Soccer Centre, the types of surfaces required for pickleball, and options for flooring. A discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •clarification on the number of hours of indoor play, the number of indoorand outdoor courts, and the status of the proposed warehouse space forpickleball; •whether the Pickering Pickleball Club would be engaged prior to making any changes to the proposed space to ensure the changes meet theClub’s needs; •if utilizing space at the Pickering Soccer Centre would resolve the issue of the number of pickleball courts needed; •a proposed amendment to the report to continue discussions with HydroOne regarding the possibility of dedicated pickleball facilities in DianaPrincess of Wales Park; •whether the six proposed pickleball courts at the Pickering Soccer Centrewere conditional on new flooring; •whether the proposed warehouse space had suitable flooring, lighting, ventilation, and zoning; •clarification on the cost and options for flooring in the warehouse space; •clarification that other locations for pickleball space were still beingexplored by staff; and, •whether staff could reconsider Alex Robertson Park as a possible outdoorpickleball location. Resolution #360/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt - 14 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 15 1.That Report ENG 16-23 regarding dedicated outdoor pickleball courtoptions in South Pickering be received; 2.That staff be directed to continue discussions with the Toronto and RegionConservation Authority with respect to possible arrangements for adedicated pickleball facility in the Petticoat Creek Conservation Park; 3.That staff be directed to continue the investigation of a potential site for a dedicated outdoor pickleball facility within South Pickering through theRecreation and Parks Master Plan update, and to continue dialogue withthe 1st Pickering Pickleball Club regarding site selection and facilitydesign; and, 4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to takethe necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried later in the Meeting (See Following Motion) Resolution #361/23 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Robinson That the main motion be amended by adding the following as a new Item #3 and that the recommendation be renumbered accordingly: That staff be directed to continue negotiations with Hydro One with respect to the possibility of dedicated pickleball facility in Diana Princess of Wales Park, and that staff report back on their findings to Council no later than Quarter 2 of 2024. Carried The Main Motion, as Amended, was then Carried 11.Report PD 09-23 of the Planning & Development Committee held on December 4,2023 11.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 40-23 Delegation of Land Division Responsibilities from the Region of Durham to the City of Pickering - 15 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 16 A brief discussion ensued regarding concerns about transparency and trust in the decision-making process. Resolution #362/23 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1.That the Draft By-law to constitute the Committee of Adjustment under the Planning Act, and to authorize the Committee to grant approval of bothminor variance and consent for land severance applications, within the Cityof Pickering, effective January 1, 2024, as set out in Appendix I to ReportPLN 40-23, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment; 2.That the Draft By-law to authorize the Director, City Development & CBO,or a designate, to grant approval of technical consent applications(including easements, lot line adjustments, title validations, and leases ormortgages greater than 21 years), within the City of Pickering, effective January 1, 2024, as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 40-23, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment; 3.That the revised Terms of Reference, pertaining to the expanded role of theCommittee of Adjustment to consider consent for land severance applications, as set out in Appendix III to Report PLN 40-23, be approved; 4.That Council direct staff to initiate an amendment to the Pickering OfficialPlan, to amend the policies to expand the role of the Committee ofAdjustment to include consent for land severance applications; to recognize the delegation of authority to the Director, City Development & CBO, or a designate, to grant approval of technical consent applications; and to setout the requirement for mandatory pre-consultation prior to the submissionof a consent application; and, 5.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take such actions as are necessary to give effect to the recommendations of thisreport. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councill Cook No: Councillor Robinson No: Councillor Robinson - 16 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 17 Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe 11.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 41-23 Bill 23: Provincial Legislation Changes to the Ontario Heritage Act and Priority Properties for Designation Resolution #363/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Cook 1.That Council endorse the recommendations of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, dated September 27, 2023, to designate 1294Kingston Road (Liverpool House), 450 Finch Avenue (Dixon House), and4993 Brock Road, under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; 2.That Council support the completion of Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports for 1027-1031 Dunbarton Road, and 4953 Brock Road todetermine their Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, and whether theproperties are candidates for designation under Part IV of the OntarioHeritage Act; 3.That appropriate City of Pickering officials further investigate the merits ofdesignating 401 Kingston Road and 1 Evelyn Avenue under Section 29,Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and report back to Council by no laterthan the first quarter of 2024; and, 4.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be directed to take necessaryactions to designate 1294 Kingston Road, 450 Finch Avenue, and 4993Brock Road under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, andinclude the properties on the City of Pickering Municipal Heritage Register. Carried Resolution #364/23 Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Brenner That Council take a brief recess. - 17 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 18 Carried Council recessed at 8:52 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 pm 12.Reports – New and Unfinished Business 12.1 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 11-23Opportunity for Petticoat Creek Conservation Park Marisa Carpino, Chief Administrative Officer, provided an overview of Report CAO 11-23 regarding the potential acquisition of Petticoat Creek Park, and introducedShawn Oakley, Real Estate Advisory, KPMG LLP. Mr. Oakley appeared before Council and through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, provided an overview of the opportunity for the acquisition of Petticoat Creek Park. Mr. Oakley advised that this was a unique opportunity for Pickering. He shared the background and purpose of the opportunity, the year-round programming opportunities, including sports and recreational activities, and the existing and future options for infrastructure in the park. Mr. Oakley provided details on the collaboration with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), and a summary of the TRCA lands. He spoke to the safety improvements that would be required if the park became municipal space and provided details on the current condition of the infrastructure and facilities. Mr. Oakley spoke to TRCA’s challenges with the park space and compared various programming opportunities currently available at other conservation areas. He spoke to the framework of the Petticoat Creek Park Master Plan including key opportunities for programming and public use. Mr. Oakley concluded his presentation with a discussion on costs and timelines for design and construction. A questions and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •whether the asking price was known and whether the City would partnerwith TRCA; •clarification of the financial implications of owning the park; •whether specific sports including cricket could be accommodated in thepark; •the positive relationship between the City and TRCA and the opportunity toseek federal and provincial funding; •the ability to provide a broad range of additional City programming such as camps; •whether staff would be investigating other water features besides a pool; •the details that would be included in the Master Plan; and, •how the Petticoat Creek Park would benefit the residents of Pickering. - 18 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 19 Resolution #365/23 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Robinson That Report CAO 11-23 regarding Opportunity for Petticoat Creek Conservation Park be received for information. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 12.2 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 12-23 Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Revised Terms of Reference Resolution #366/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt 1.That Council endorse the revised Terms of Reference for the PickeringAnti-Black Racism Taskforce, as set out in Attachment 1; 2.That the term of Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce members appointed on March 27, 2023, by Resolution #147/23 be amended to endon November 14, 2026, in accordance with Section 6 of the updated Termsof Reference; and, 3.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 12.3 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 23-23 2024 User Fees Resolution #367/23 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Cook 1.That Council approve the attached General Municipal Fees and ChargesBy-law to amend By-laws 6191/03 and 7362/14, and that such fees be - 19 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 20 incorporated into the User Fee Schedule I into the 2024 Current Budget save and except for the following changes: a) 2024 Proposed Fee for Minor Variance – Residential Major – Single Variance: •Delete “$2,250.00” and replace with “$2,520.00”; b)2024 Proposed Fee for Zoning By-law Amendment – Pre-submissionReview – Next 100 Units (101-200): •Delete “$105.00” and replace with “$170.00”; c)2024 Proposed Fee for Official Plan Amendment - Pre-submissionReview – Additional Fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt: •Delete “$3,040.00” and replace with “$3,400.00”; and, d)2024 Proposed Fee for Revisions to Draft Approved Plan – (redlinerevisions) – Application – Next 75 Units (26-100): •Delete “$800.00” and replace with “$500.00”; and, 2.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given the authority to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Carried 12.4 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 24-23 Restructuring of Reserves and Reserve Funds A brief discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding clarification on the different types of reserve funds and how they are used. Resolution #368/23 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Nagy 1.That Report FIN 24-23 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received; 2.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to: - 20 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 21 a)Transfer the balance in the Community Facilities Reserve Fund as atDecember 31, 2023 to the Facilities Reserve and close the CommunityFacilities Reserve Fund; b)Transfer the balances in the following reserves as at December 31,2023 to the Facilities Reserve and close the reserves: •Contingency – True Sports Reserve •Surcharge – Program Reserve •Surcharge – Dunbarton Pool Reserve •Surcharge – Don Beer Arena Reserve •Surcharge – Rec Complex Core Reserve •Surcharge – Rec Complex Pool Reserve •Surcharge – Rec Complex Arena Reserve •Accessibility Initiatives Reserve •Minor Buildings Replacement Reserve c)Transfer the balance in Contingency – Miscellaneous Reserve as at December 31, 2023 to the Rate Stabilization Reserve and close theContingency – Miscellaneous Reserve; d)Transfer the balance in Accelerated Infrastructure Program Reserve as at December 31, 2023 to the Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund and close the Accelerated Infrastructure Program Reserve; e)Transfer the balance in the Capital Works Reserve Fund as atDecember 31, 2023 to the Parks Reserve and close the Capital Works Reserve Fund; and f)Close the Seaton FIA Reserve. 3.That the Replacement of Capital Equipment Reserve be renamed the Information Technology Reserve; 4.That the Major Equipment Replacement Reserve be renamed theEquipment Replacement Reserve; 5.That the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund be renamed the CanadaCommunity Building Reserve Fund and the draft By-law, included asAttachment 1 to Report FIN 24-23, to rename the reserve fund and repealthe Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund By-law Number 6609/05, be approved, and enacted to reflect this name change; - 21 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 22 6.That the draft By-law, included as Attachment 2 to Report FIN 24-23, torepeal the Community Facilities Development Reserve Fund By-lawNumber 357/76 be approved and enacted; 7.That the draft By-law, included as Attachment 3 to Report FIN 24-23, torepeal the Capital Works Reserve Fund By-law Number C9/1980, beapproved and enacted; and, 8.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Carried 12.5 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 25-23 St. Paul’s On-The-Hill Grant Request A brief discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding the importance of these funds for St. Paul’s On-The Hill food bank and whether there would be future opportunities for more grant funding through the Mayor’s 2024 Budget. Resolution #369/23 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Cook 1.That Report FIN 25-23 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received; 2.That Council approve a grant in the amount of $8,763.52 to St. Paul’s On- The-Hill and this expense be funded from account 503040.11100; and, 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take thenecessary action to give effect hereto. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 12.6 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report LEG 07-23 Expropriation of Easement at Tribute (Liverpool) Inc. Site −Walnut Lane Extension −Part Lot 23, Concession 1, Northwest corner of Liverpool Road and Highway401 - 22 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 23 A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •clarification on Staff’s recommendation; •whether the City needed to initiate the expropriation process if anagreement was reached between the parties; •clarification on the expropriation process and that any binding agreement would be presented to Council for approval; •clarification on the risks of not approving the staff recommendation; and, •clarification on the expropriation timelines. Resolution #370/23 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Nagy 1.That authority be granted to City of Pickering staff to initiate expropriationproceedings for the acquisition of an easement interest held by WildavInternational Developments Limited over lands owned by Tribute(Liverpool) Inc. for the purposes of building an extension of Walnut Lane, as depicted in Attachment 1; 2.That authority be granted to City of Pickering staff to serve and publishNotices of Application for Approval to Expropriate the said easementinterest as described in Recommendation 1 of this Report, and to forward to the Ontario Land Tribunal any requests for hearing received, to attendthe hearings to present the City of Pickering’s position, and to present theOntario Land Tribunal’s recommendations to City Council for consideration; 3.That authority be granted to the City Clerk and the Mayor to execute any notices and forms as may be statutorily mandated by the Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26 to give effect to Recommendation 2 in thisReport, including the Notices of Application of Approval to Expropriate; and, 4.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this Report. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles No: Councillor Robinson Councillor Brenner - 23 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 24 Mayor Ashe 13.Motions and Notice of Motions 14.By-laws 14.1 By-law 8057/23 Being a by-law to provide for the administration and enforcement of the Building Code Act, 1992 within the City of Pickering. 14.2 By-law 8058/23 Being a by-law to repeal By-Law 1448/82, a by-law to establish a Civic Recognition Committee. 14.3 By-law 8059/23 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 14.4 By-law 8060/23 Being a by-law for the collection of taxes and to establish the instalment due dates for the Interim Levy 2024. 14.5 By-law 8061/23 Being a by-law to authorize the temporary borrowing of monies to meet the current and capital expenditures of the City of Pickering for the year 2024. 14.6 By-law 8062/23 Being a by-law to provide property tax relief to eligible heritage property in the City of Pickering. 14.7 By-law 8063/23 Being a by-law to constitute a Committee of Adjustment under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P13. - 24 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 25 14.8 By-law 8064/23 Being a by-law to delegate to the Director, City Development & CBO authority of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P13. 14.9 By-law 8065/23 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6191/03 and 7362/14 to confirm General Municipal Fees. 14.10 By-law 8066/23 Being a by-law to provide for the establishment of a Reserve Fund to be known as the Canada Community Building Reserve Fund. 14.11 By-law 8067/23 Being a by-law to repeal By-law 357/76 being a By-law to establish a Reserve Fund (known as the Reserve Fund for Community Facilities Development). 14.12 By-law 8068/23 Being a by-law to repeal By-law C9/1980 being a By-law to amend the Town of Pickering Municipal Code to establish a reserve fund for the Financing of a Capital Works Program. 14.13 By-law 8069/23 Being a by-law to appoint Melissa Levesque as a Municipal Law Enforcement Officer for the purpose of enforcing the by-laws of The Corporation of the City of Pickering. Resolution #371/23 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Nagy That By-law Numbers 8057/23 through 8069/23 be approved, with By-law 8065/23 being approved as amended. Carried - 25 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 26 15.Confidential Council – Public Report Mayor Ashe stated that prior to the Regular Council Meeting, an In-camera session was held at 4:30 p.m. in accordance with the Municipal Act and the Procedure By-law to consider a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board, receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality or local board. These matters were discussed in closed session as they pertained to Legal advice from the City Solicitor, the City’s offer and attempted purchase of Frenchman’s Bay, and an opportunity pertaining to Petticoat Creek Conservation Park. There was no direction given to staff for Items 3.1 or 3.2 of the In-camera Session Agenda. Direction was provided for Item 3.3. 15.1 Confidential Verbal Update from the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitorand Mayor Ashe Re: City of Pickering’s Offer pertaining to the Attempted Purchase of Frenchman’s Bay Having previously declared a conflict of interest, Councillor Pickles did not vote on the following item. Resolution #372/23 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Nagy That the confidential direction provided to during the in-camera portion of the Meeting be approved. Carried 16.Regional Councillor Updates 16.1 Councillor Cook provided an update on budget items from the Region of Durham’s Special Works Committee Meeting. 17.Other Business 17.1 Councillor Brenner gave Notice that he would be bringing forward a Motion regarding a commemorative bench recognition. 17.2 Councillor Butt gave Notice that he would be bringing forward a Motion on tree cutting fees and a Motion pertaining to Parking By-laws. - 26 - Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2023 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 7:00 pm 27 18.Confirmatory By-law By-law Number 8070/23 Councillor Cook, seconded by Councillor Nagy moved for leave to introduce a By-law ofthe City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of December 11, 2023. Carried 19.Adjournment Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Robinson That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 10:21 pm. Dated this 11th day of December 2023. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 27 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cook 1 Present: Mayor Kevin Ashe Councillors: M.Brenner S.Butt L. Cook M.Nagy D. Pickles L. Robinson Also Present: M. Carpino -Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley -Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni -Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor B. Duffield -Director, Operations J. Eddy -Director, Human Resources L. Gibbs -(Acting) Director, Community Services R. Holborn -Director, Engineering Services S. Karwowski -Director, Finance & Treasurer N. Robinson -Deputy Fire Chief S. Cassel -City Clerk A. MacGillivray -Committee Coordinator 1.Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating in- person. 2.Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3.Delegations Moved by Mayor AsheSeconded by Councillor Robinson That the rules of procedure be suspended to allow for an additional delegation, underSection 4 of the Agenda, regarding Report PLN 01-24. - 28 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cook 2 Carried on a Two-Thirds Vote 3.1 Iain Donnell, Lawyer, Donnell Law Group Ed Saki, Pickering Resident Re: Report PLN 01-24 Part IV Designation of 301 Kingston Road Ian Donnell, Lawyer, Donnell Law Group, appeared before Council via electronic connection regarding PLN 01-24. Mr. Donnell advised that he had provided a letter to Council earlier in the day noting that he did not receive the Report that was sent out on January 5, 2024, and asked that the Report be deferred to a later date in order for his client to review the Report and to have adequate time to submit the information requested by the City. Ed Saki, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council to advise that he agreed with Mr. Donnell’s request to defer Report PLN 01-24 to a later date. A brief discussion ensued between Members of Council and Mr. Donnell regarding: •whether deferring the matter to the March 2024 Executive CommitteeMeeting would give sufficient time for Mr. Donnell’s client to review theReport; and, •assurance that the property would be left in a safe state with no furtherdestruction or damage to the site pending the Report coming back toCommittee. 4.Matters for Consideration 4.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 01-24Part IV Designation of 301 Kingston Road A brief discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •the option to refer Report PLN 01-2024 back to staff instead of deferringthe matter to the March 2024 Executive Committee meeting to provide staffsufficient time to review the information provided by Donnell Law Groupand Mr. Saki, with the Heritage Advisory Committee; and, •whether the recent legislative changes to the Ontario Heritage Act wouldaffect the property from being included in the Municipal Heritage Register. Recommendation: Moved by Councillor Robinson - 29 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cook 3 Seconded by Mayor Ashe 1.That Council endorse the recommendations of the Heritage PickeringAdvisory Committee, dated November 22, 2023, to designate 301 KingstonRoad, under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; 2.That the owner submit a Conservation Plan, which shall include a detaileddescription of the conservation (restoration and rehabilitation) scope ofwork for 301 Kingston Road supported by architectural drawings; and, 3.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be directed to take necessaryactions to designate 301 Kingston Road under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and include the property on the City of PickeringMunicipal Heritage Register. Note: The disposition of this matter was determined through the following referral motion Recommendation: Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Mayor Ashe 1.That Report PLN 01-24 be referred back to staff to investigate the merits,and to allow staff time to engage with the Heritage Advisory Committee, the property owner, and Donnell Law Group, regarding the designation of 301Kingston Road under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; and, 2.That staff report back to Council no later than Q2 2024. Carried 4.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 02-24 Tree Protection By-law Update Response to Council Resolution #333/23 on Report PLN 37-23 (the Phase 3 Recommendation Report) A discussion ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: •clarification of the minimum and maximum fines under the Municipal Act, and if fines could exceed the maximum; •clarification that the By-law includes a special fine that may exceed themaximum under specific circumstances; and, - 30 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cook 4 •clarification that fines are determined on a case-by-case basis anddetermined by the Provincial Court based on the severity of the offence. Recommendation: Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1.That Council approve the new modernized Tree Protection By-law, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 02-24; 2.That Council approve an amendment to the General Municipal Fees &Charges By-law 6191/03, as amended, as set out in Appendix II, toimplement the modernized Tree Protection By-law; and, 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given authority to take thenecessary actions to give effect thereto. Carried 5.Member Updates on Committees 5.1 Councillor Brenner provided an update on the Accessibility Advisory Committeewith respect to the current reduction in Durham Region Transit (DRT) services that have impacted marginalized residents, including those with accessibility needs. He advised that the DRT matter would be discussed at the January 17, 2024, Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting, and that he would be bringing information back to Council from the Committee on how the City can respond to Durham Region Transit to have these services reinstated. 6.Other Business 6.1 Councillor Brenner gave Notice that he would be bringing forward a Motionregarding Durham Region Transit’s reduction of services in Pickering. 6.2 Councillor Brenner gave Notice that he would be bringing forward a Motion regarding parks winter maintenance. 6.3 Councillor Cook gave Notice that she would be bringing forward a Motion regarding 2024 Provincial Budget funding requests for adults with autism spectrum disorder. 7.Adjournment - 31 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cook 5 Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Nagy That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 2:25 pm. - 32 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting Present: Mayor Kevin Ashe Councillors: M. BrennerS. ButtL. Cook M. NagyD. Pickles L. Robinson Also Present: M. Carpino -Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley -Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni -Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor N.Robinson -Deputy Fire Chief L. Gibbs -(Acting) Director, Community Services B. Duffield -Director, Operations R. Holborn -Director, Engineering Services S. Karwowski -Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel -City Clerk A.MacGillivray -Committee Coordinator 1.Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating in-person. 2.Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3.Delegations 3.1 George Turner, Pickering Resident Re: Report ENG 01-24 Amendment to the Road Servicing Agreement with Tribute (Liverpool) Limited -Walnut Lane Extension George Turner, Pickering Resident appeared before Council to speak to concerns regarding Report ENG 01-24. Mr. Turner indicated that he was of the opinion that - 33 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting the extension of Walnut Lane was not necessary and that he had questions of Council and staff regarding the project. Mr. Turner asked for clarification regarding what measures were in place to prevent project cost overruns and questioned the additional funds requested for the Whitevale Drainage Project and the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre in the upcoming capital budget. He spoke to the response he received from staff regarding the City’s procurement and approval processes and raised concerns as to why this matter was being considered at a Special Meeting of Council rather than a regular Council Meeting. Mr. Turner inquired as to whether this project was being considered in isolation from other City projects and spoke to the proposed scope reductions for the project that would impact elements such as the multi-use path, public art, and seating areas. He suggested that the City should consider modifying the bridge to be a pedestrian bridge rather than a bridge for vehicle traffic. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff, and Mr. Turner regarding: • the need to consider the matter at a Special Council Meeting due to time constraints relating to maintaining tender rights; • clarification that the project was not being reviewed in isolation from other City projects; • clarification regarding the City’s processes to monitor and manage project costs; and, • clarification that Development Charges (DCs) collected for the purpose of constructing the bridge are obligated to be spent on the construction costs of the bridge. Mr. Turner concluded his delegation speaking to his past work experience and the importance of reviewing and changing processes when necessary to ensure proper project controls are in place. 4. Matters for Consideration 4.1 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 01-24 Amendment to the Road Servicing Agreement with Tribute (Liverpool) Limited - Walnut Lane Extension Richard Holborn, Director, Engineering Services, provided an overview of ENG 01-24, the City’s partnership with Tribute Communities, and the request from staff for additional funds for the project due to contractor bids coming in above what was approved in the 2022 and 2023 Capital Budgets. Mr. Holborn concluded his remarks advising that the requested funds also include a contingency of 5% amounting to the sum of $397,091.00. - 34 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • staff’s recommendation to remove elements of the project for cost savings including the multiuse path along the north side of Walnut Lane, the storm sewer outfall access roads, and temporary streetlighting and signaling associated with the construction of the multi-use path; • clarification that bike lanes and a concrete pedestrian sidewalk were also provisioned to be included as part of the Walnut Lane extension; • clarification regarding storm sewer outfall access roads and that they could be deferred until if and when the sewer outfall needed rehabilitation; • concerns regarding the potential for increased costs as a result of deferring project elements; • concerns that the proposed removal of elements from the project would significantly change the planned community; • clarification regarding the removal of temporary lighting and signaling that was associated with the construction of the multi-use path; • whether the muti-use path and the storm sewer outfall access roads were identified in the environmental assessment (EA) process; • clarification regarding the implications of refusing the proposed tender; • concerns regarding the project not proceeding and the potential higher costs if the tender had to be reissued; • clarification regarding the accounts from which the additional funds would come from; • clarification as to whether the contingency fund would increase as the total project cost increases; • clarification regarding the involvement of Tribute Communities in the project and that the additional costs were the City’s responsibility as it was a City project; • clarification as to how the extension of Walnut Lane would enhance traffic movements in the area; • whether there would be any legal risk to the City if they did not move forward with the tender; • clarification that the City is obligated to undertake the Walnut Lane extension as it was approved by a Class EA and DCs were collected for the project; • clarification as to whether or not constructing the access roads to the sewer water outfall would pose any risks and that the construction of the access roads could take place when repairs are needed in the future; and, • whether the City develops relationships and evaluates the vendors it works with. Resolution #373/24 - 35 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Nagy 1. That the Road Servicing Agreement with Tribute (Liverpool) Limited to facilitate for the construction of the Walnut Lane extension between Kingston Road and Liverpool Road be revised to reflect an increase in the total project cost in the amount of $1,097,815.00 (plus HST); 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the revised Road Servicing Agreement between the City of Pickering and Tribute (Liverpool) Limited subject to revisions acceptable to the Director, Engineering Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the additional project cost of $1,240,531.00 (HST included) and net project cost of $1,117,137.00 (net of HST rebate), above the approved 2022 and 2023 Capital Budget amounts, as outlined in the revised Road Servicing Agreement as follows: a) the additional sum of $279,284.00 to be funded from a transfer from the City’s DC Share Reserve; b) the additional sum of $837,853.00 to be funded from a transfer from the Development Charges -Transportation Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried Later in the Meeting (See Following Motion) Resolution #374/24 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1. That Item 1 of the main motion be amended by replacing $1,097,815.00 (plus HST) with $1,247,815.00 (plus HST) to include the additional costs associated with the multi-use path on the north side of Walnut Lane, and the temporary streetlighting; - 36 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting 2. That Item 3 of the main motion be amended by replacing $1,240,531.00 (HST included) with $1,410,031.00 (HST included) and $1,117,137.00 (net of HST rebate) with $1,269,777.00 (net of HST rebate); and, 3. That a new Item 3 (c) be added to read as follows: (c) That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to fund the additional costs at his discretion. Carried on a Recorded Vote as follows: Yes No Mayor Ashe Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Councillor Robinson The Main Motion, as amended, was then Carried on a Recorded Vote as follows: Yes No Mayor Ashe Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Councillor Robinson Resolution #375/24 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Council move into closed session in accordance with the provisions of Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act and the Procedure By-law, to consider a matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; a trade secret or scientific, technical, commercial, financial or labour relations information, supplied in confidence to the municipality which if disclosed could reasonably be expected to prejudice significantly the competitive position or interfere significantly with the contractual or other negotiations of a person, group of persons, or organization; a trade secret or scientific, technical, - 37 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting commercial or financial information that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value; and, a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality as it pertains to Elexicon Corporation Strategic Initiatives. Carried Members of Council and applicable staff moved from the Council Chambers to the Main Committee Room for the in-camera portion of the Meeting. 5. In Camera Matters (Main Committee Room) 5.1 Confidential Verbal Update from the Chief Administrative Officer and Receipt of Legal Advice from J. Mark Rodger, Partner, BLG LLP Re: Elexicon Corporation Strategic Initiatives This portion of the meeting was closed to the public. Refer to the In Camera meeting minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] Resolution # 376/24 Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Nagy That Council rise to the open session of the Special Meeting of Council. Carried 6. Confidential Special Council – Public Report (Council Chambers) Mayor Ashe stated that during the closed portion of the meeting, Council received a confidential verbal update and advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, as it pertains to Elexicon Corporation Strategic Initiatives and that no decisions were made and no direction was provided to staff. 7. Confirmatory By-law By-law Number 8071/24 Councillor Brenner, seconded by Councillor Cook moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of January 8, 2024. - 38 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 8, 2024 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting Carried 6. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Robinson That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 4:59 pm. Dated this 8th of January, 2023. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 39 - If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact Eamonn.Rodgers@durham.ca or call 1-800-372-1102 extension 3677. The Regional Municipality of Durham Corporate Services Department – Legislative Services Division 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 1 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-77111-800-372-1102 durham.ca Alexander Harras M.P.A.Director of Legislative Services & Regional Clerk December 20, 2023 Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building Queen's Park Toronto ON M7A 1A1 premier@ontario.ca Dear Premier Ford: RE: Request the Government of Ontario to provide core funding for organizations providing programs, care, and services for adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder as part of the 2024 Provincial Budget, Our File: C00 Council of the Region of Durham, at its meeting held on December 20, 2023, passed the following resolution: Whereas the bulk of government funded programs for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) end at age 18 in Ontario; And Whereas families supporting a loved one with ASD are often forced to make the difficult decision between expensive private day programs and leaving the workforce to provide care; And Whereas getting out of the home and connecting with others can alleviate social isolation, improve mental and physical health, and lead to an overall better quality of life; And Whereas Autism Home Base, based in Bowmanville and with weekly drop-ins at McLean Community Centre in Ajax, provides supports and services to 191 Durham Region families, or more than 450 participants, five days a week; And Whereas by supporting programs for adults with ASD, the Government of Ontario can achieve its goal of keeping patients healthy in their communities and out of hospitals, as noted in the Ministry of Health’s 2022-2023 Strategic Plan; And Whereas Ajax Council supported a motion on November 27, 2023, requesting that the province provide core funding for Corr. 01-24 - 40 - organizations that offer programs, care and services for adults with ASD; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Durham Regional Council formally requests that the Government of Ontario provide core funding for organizations providing programs, care, and services for adults with ASD, including Autism Home Base, as part of the 2024 Provincial Budget; and A copy of this resolution be forwarded to Premier Doug Ford, Minister Health Sylvia Jones, Minister Finance Peter Bethlenfalvy, Minister Mental Health and Addictions Michael Tibollo, all Durham Region MPPs, all lower tier Durham municipalities, local school boards, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, and Autism Ontario. Alexander Harras Alexander Harras, Director of Legislative Services & Regional Clerk AH/sr c: Premier Doug Ford Minister of Health, Sylvia Jones, MPP Minister of Finance, Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addiction, Michael Tibollo, MPP Patrice Barnes, MPP Lorne Coe, MPP Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery, Todd McCarthy, MPP Jennifer French, MPP Laurie Scott, MPP David Piccini, MPP Town of Ajax Township of Brock Municipality of Clarington City of Oshawa City of Pickering Township of Scugog Township of Uxbridge Town of Whitby Durham District School Board - 41 - Durham Catholic District School Board Kawartha Pineridge District School Board Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board Association of Municipalities of Ontario Autism Ontario - 42 - Corr. 02-24 - 43 - Policy Update – Social and Economic Prosperity Review Yesterday, AMO presented to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs outlining our recommendations for the provincial 2024 budget. AMO highlighted how the current provincial-municipal fiscal arrangements are undermining the social and economic prosperity of Ontario. We are asking the provincial government to sit down with municipalities and work together on a social and economic prosperity review: a joint review of revenues, costs and financial risks and a detailed analysis of Ontario’s infrastructure investment and service delivery needs. We need your help. Municipal councils are encouraged to support AMO’s ongoing advocacy efforts by: Highlighting the challenges municipalities are facing and the need for this review during delegations at the upcoming ROMA conference in January, meetings with local MPPs, and your communities, using key messages included in AMO's pre- budget backgrounder Passing a council resolution at your next meeting, calling on the province to commit to this review in its upcoming provincial budget Sharing your support with local media channels using our news release template Meeting with or writing to local MPPs (sample wording) in advance of provincial budget *Disclaimer: The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) is unable to provide any warranty regarding the accuracy or completeness of third-party submissions. Distribution of these items does not imply an endorsement of the views, information or services mentioned. Association of Municipalities of Ontario 200 University Ave. Suite 801,Toronto ON Canada M5H 3C6 To unsubscribe, please| Opt Out 155 University Ave Suite 800 | Toronto, ON M5H 3B7 CA Corr. 03-24 - 44 - 1 Remarks by: Brian Rosborough, Executive Director, Association of Municipalities of Ontario January 9, 2024 (Check Against Delivery) My name is Brian Rosborough. I am the Executive Director of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. I am joined by my colleague Lindsay Jones, AMO’s Director of Policy and Government Relations. Thank-you for the opportunity to join you this evening. - 45 - 2 In October 2023, AMO called on the Premier to agree to working together to update the provincial-municipal partnership. Current provincial-municipal fiscal arrangements undermine the social and economic prosperity of Ontario. AMO is outlining this expectation as a part of the upcoming spring budget. We are asking the Government to agree to sit down with municipalities and work together to build a better Ontario. - 46 - 3 Ontarians expect orders of government to work together effectively, and to respect taxpayers. Municipal councils are concerned about how much more can be raised through property tax and user fee increases. That’s what is required in the face of the increasingly complex challenges of providing the services and infrastructure needed for a thriving provincial economy. Ontario’s municipalities are critical to the provincial economy and quality of life across this province. - 47 - 4 They provide the services that residents and businesses rely on most. Municipal governments invest revenues of over $60 billion annually in key public services and infrastructure. These investments in Ontario are equivalent to roughly one third of the annual provincial spending plan. Municipalities respond to changing social and economic pressures. - 48 - 5 They deliver programs and services that support residents at all ages and stages of life, including: • public health, • long-term care, • childcare • all emergency services, and • much more. They also own and operate more infrastructure for the benefit of the public than the provincial and federal governments – with a total value of nearly half a trillion dollars. - 49 - 6 Municipal investments in services and infrastructure drive growth and build the communities that make this province: • a great place to live, and • a great destination for people and investment. Municipal revenues do not grow with the economy or inflation. Limited federal and provincial grants to municipalities don’t grow with inflation either. As of 2021, property taxes in Ontario were already amongst the highest in the country at $2,200 per capita. - 50 - 7 In 2024, many municipalities will need to significantly increase property taxes to address a “perfect storm” of factors, including: • growth pressures, • inflation, and • recent policy decisions that have pushed municipalities to the brink. Ontario’s municipalities pay for services that typically fall under provincial jurisdiction in other provinces, including health, housing, and social services. In 2022, municipal expenditures in these areas outpaced provincial grants by nearly $4 billion. - 51 - 8 The financial tools available to municipalities were never intended to support health programs and income re- distribution. The result we all see in our communities is unmet needs that undermine Ontario’s social and economic prosperity. Ontario is growing. To support growth, municipalities are committed to doing everything they can to help the province build 1.5 million homes by 2031. - 52 - 9 Municipalities are accountable for housing-enabling infrastructure. They make critical decisions that can unlock housing and meet the demands of Ontario’s growing population. Meeting this ambitious target will require significant investments in essential municipal infrastructure. And they need a strong partner in the Government of Ontario to ensure the policy levers - and the funding - are available to plan, finance, and construct the necessary infrastructure to support growth across the province. - 53 - 10 AMO, and our more than 400 members, believe that the foundation of our collective prosperity lies in strong partnerships between municipal governments and the Government of Ontario. Municipalities and the provincial government have a strong history of collaboration. Most recently, this was demonstrated throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. This partnership saved lives and safeguarded the economy during unprecedented times. - 54 - 11 In 2008, the province and municipalities engaged in the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal and Service Delivery Review to develop a shared vision to help rebalance roles, responsibilities, and finances. The result of that review is $2 billion a year of municipal revenues funding municipal infrastructure rather than provincial social assistance programs. 15 years later, the time for another discussion about the fiscal partnership is long overdue. That’s why AMO is calling on the provincial government to commit to a social and economic prosperity review as - 55 - 12 a part of the upcoming budget, including: • a joint review of revenues, costs, and financial risks, and • a detailed analysis of Ontario’s infrastructure investment and service delivery needs. We believe the time is right for a province-wide conversation where municipalities and the province come together to re-establish the stability and sustainability of municipal finances province-wide. Working together, we can build a better Ontario. - 56 - AMO Social and Economic Prosperity Review New realities demand a new approach to the provincial-municipal fiscal relationship The municipal fiscal framework is compromising Ontario’s economic and social prosperity Municipal revenues do not grow with the economy or inflation • Municipalities rely heavily on property taxes, which do not grow with the economy or inflation. • In 2022, annual average inflation rate was 6.8% – leaving municipalities to contend with increased wages, construction costs, and interest rates without corresponding growth in revenue. • Federal and provincial governments saw record revenue growth in 2022 driven by inflation and economic activity, with no inflation adjustments to most municipal grants such as the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF). Municipal property taxes subsidize the provincial treasury by almost $4 billion a year • Nearly a third of municipal spending in Ontario is for services in areas of provincial responsibility – such as social housing, long-term care, public health, childcare and social services. • Municipalities in Ontario provide services that typically fall under provincial jurisdiction in other provinces. Provincial contributions offset these costs – but only in part. • In 2022, municipal expenditures in these areas outpaced provincial contributions by almost $4 billion – a figure that is expected to grow in future years. • Municipalities provide critical services that are central to Ontario’s economy and quality of life, investing more than $60B annually in important public services and infrastructure. • The fiscal framework that enables municipalities to deliver infrastructure and services is broken – failing residents, small businesses and major industries. • Long-standing structural problems have combined with growth pressures, economic factors, social challenges and provincial policy decisions to push municipalities to the brink. • Last adjusted in 2008, a review of provincial-municipal financial arrangements is long overdue. • AMO calls on Premier Ford to do what taxpayers expect – work together with municipal governments to modernize this partnership and build a solid foundation for economic growth and quality of life. $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 $10Amount (Billions) Municipal ExpendituresProvincial Grants • This figure is not exhaustive, as the province continues to download costs in other areas. For example, AMO estimates that municipalities and property taxpayers are currently on the hook for more than $400 million in hospital capital and equipment costs that should rightfully be funded by the provincial treasury. - 57 - Current fiscal arrangements undermine municipalities’ ability to invest in infrastructure • Municipalities own and operate more public infrastructure than the provincial and federal governments – valued at nearly half a trillion dollars. • The ambitious goal of 1.5 million new homes by 2031 depends on building essential municipal infrastructure and the public investment to support it. • Bill 23 resulted in municipalities’ having $1 billion less to fund growth. • Maintaining current assets in the face of climate change also brings growing costs. In 2021, the Financial Accountability Office estimated that the cost to bring existing municipal assets to a state of good repair was approximately $52 billion. Property taxpayers, including small business owners and seniors on fixed incomes, can’t afford to pay for provincial costs • Increasingly, municipalities are being asked to take on complex health and social challenges – like homelessness, supporting asylum seekers and addressing the mental health and addictions crises. • Ontario’s property taxes are already the second highest in the country. • The property tax base was never meant to support income re-distribution. Partners in prosperity: the province can invest more in Ontario’s prosperity Despite strong fiscal fundamentals, Ontario has underinvested for decades • Ontario’s spending per capita is the lowest in Canada at $11,974 • Real per capita spending in children’s and social services, education and post-secondary schools have all declined by over 10% since 2018 • Provincial deficit, debt-to-GDP ratios and the percent of revenues going towards interest payments are all at 10-year lows. • The Province is a key beneficiary of housing market. »Provincial government’s share of the purchase price of a new home has climbed steeply over the past 10 years – increasing by 55% compared to local governments’ 13%. »The housing market delivers the Ontario Government $4.4 billion a year in Land Transfer Tax, in addition to HST collected on new houses. A social and economic prosperity review Ontarians expect their elected officials to work together effectively and respect their tax dollars. We believe the time is right for a province-wide conversation where municipalities and the province come together to promote the stability and sustainability of municipal finances province-wide. AMO is calling on the provincial government to commit to this review as part of the upcoming budget, with a view to developing a consensus report with recommendations by 2025. Working together, we can build a better Ontario. 155 University Avenue Suite 800, Toronto, ON M5H 3B7 416.971.9856 | amo@amo.on.ca | www.amo.on.ca- 58 - Dra� Resolu�on WHEREAS current provincial-municipal fiscal arrangements are undermining Ontario’s economic prosperity and quality of life WHEREAS nearly a third of municipal spending in Ontario is for services in areas of provincial responsibility and expenditures are outpacing provincial contribu�ons by nearly $4 billion a year WHEREAS municipal revenues, such as property taxes, do not grow with the economy or infla�on WHEREAS unprecedented popula�on and housing growth will require significant investments in municipal infrastructure WHEREAS municipali�es are being asked to take on complex health and social challenges – like homelessness, suppor�ng asylum seekers and addressing the mental health and addic�ons crises WHEREAS infla�on, rising interest rates, and provincial policy decisions are sharply constraining municipal fiscal capacity WHEREAS property taxpayers – including people on fixed incomes and small businesses – can’t afford to subsidize income re-distribu�on programs for those most in need WHEREAS the province can, and should, invest more in the prosperity of communi�es WHEREAS municipali�es and the provincial government have a strong history of collabora�on THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Province of Ontario commit to undertaking with the Associa�on of Municipali�es of Ontario a comprehensive social and economic prosperity review to promote the stability and sustainability of municipal finances across Ontario - 59 - NEWS RELEASE A more prosperous Ontario demands a modern provincial-municipal fiscal partnership [Date], 2024 – [MUNICIPALITY] joins the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) in calling on the province to commit to reviewing the provincial-municipal fiscal framework as part of the upcoming provincial budget. In early January, AMO, a non-profit organization representing almost all of Ontario’s 444 municipal governments, highlighted the need for a Social and Economic Prosperity Review as part of its Pre-Budget Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs. Municipalities provide infrastructure and critical services that are central to Ontario’s economic prosperity and quality of life, investing more than $60 billion annually in communities. The fiscal framework that municipalities rely on to deliver infrastructure and services is broken – failing residents, small businesses and major industries. Unlike the province, municipal revenues do not grow with the economy or inflation. New realities, including the pressures of growth, economic factors like inflation and interest rates, social challenges, and provincial policy decisions are pushing municipalities to the brink. [MUNICIPALITY] joins AMO in calling on Premier Ford to do what taxpayers except – work together with municipal governments to modernize this partnership and build a solid foundation for economic and social prosperity that is fair and affordable for taxpayers. INSERT: supportive quote from MAYOR/REEVE. Last adjusted in 2008, a review of provincial-municipal financial arrangements is long overdue. Municipalities continue to subsidize the provincial treasury by almost $4 billion each year by paying for provincial responsibilities such as social housing, long-term care, public health, childcare and social services. Ontario’s property taxes are already the second highest in the county, while provincial spending per capita is the lowest in Canada. Property taxpayers, including small business owners and seniors on fixed incomes, can’t afford to keep paying provincial costs. As Ontario grows, major investment in essential municipal infrastructure is required to achieve the province’s ambitious target of building 1.5 million new homes by 2031. However, Bill 23 created a $1 billion annual hole in municipalities’ ability to fund this foundational new infrastructure that will help our province grow. Ontario’s provincial and municipal governments have a strong history of collaboration. [MUNICIPALITY] and AMO believe the time is right for a province-wide conversation where municipalities and the province come together to promote the stability and sustainability of municipal finances province-wide. -30- Quote from AMO President Colin Best: “Ontarians expect governments to work together and respect tax dollars. Local governments need help to address affordability, invest in infrastructure and the economy, and tackle social challenges like increasing homelessness. Working together, AMO believes that the province and municipalities can build a better Ontario.” - 60 - Dear Member of the Legislature, In October 2023, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) called on the Premier to agree to an update of the provincial-municipal partnership by conducting a social and economic prosperity review: a joint review of revenues, costs and financial risks and a detailed analysis of Ontario’s infrastructure investment and service delivery needs. As you know, Ontario’s municipal governments provide critical services that residents rely on most every day. The ability to provide these services depends on a fiscal framework that enables municipalities to balance revenues and expenditures responsibly and fairly, reflecting local circumstances and priorities. Municipalities across Ontario are also facing increasingly complex challenges, such as tackling homelessness and climate change, without the financial tools to solve them. In 2022, municipal expenditures outpaced provincial contributions by nearly $4 billion in areas of provincial responsibility including social housing, long-term care, land ambulance, social services, and childcare. This current arrangement makes it impossible for municipalities to invest in the infrastructure needed to support housing and economic growth, or to prepare for the impacts of climate change. Property taxpayers, including small business owners and seniors on fixed incomes, can’t afford to pay for the province’s affordability and homelessness crisis. Taxpayers expect governments to work together to solve problems. We urge you to engage with your colleagues in the legislature to urge the Government of Ontario to conduct this critical review. Sincerely, - 61 - Corr. 04-24 - 62 - Report to Council Report Number: OPS 02-24 Date: January 22, 2024 From: Brian Duffield Director, Operations Subject: Facilities Renewal Study -File:A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Report OPS 02-24 regarding the City of Pickering Facilities Renewal Studyprepared by PSD Citywide Inc., dated January 2024 be endorsed in principle; 2.That recommendations of Report OPS 02-24 and the Facilities Renewal Study beconsidered, along with other municipal priorities, through future annual municipal plansand budget process; and 3.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The City of Pickering is facing the acute and combined challenges of funding for new growth while also maintaining aging existing infrastructure. With a few recent exceptions, most of the City’s existing buildings were built prior to the turn of the century with the oldest reaching back to origins in the 1860s. Many of these facilities are nearing the end of their serviceable life. PSD Citywide Inc. prepared the City’s Asset Management Plan in 2020 and were retained in the fall of 2023 to review and analyze key factors affecting facilities assets. Their task and objective was to recommend a fact-based methodology by which future investment in existing facilities should be prioritized. The Facility Renewal Study makes no specific recommendations for individual buildings, but provides the framework through which such decisions should be considered from an asset management perspective, subject to other applicable needs and circumstances. This report provides additional options and information for consideration regarding specific City facilities based on the existing conditions of individual or grouped related facilities. Its intent is to provide guidance for future capital investments in facilities, and identify whether and where renewal, replacement, or disposal may be appropriate. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to all six of the Pickering Strategic Plan Priorities, notably focusing on the key principle of good governance. - 63 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 2 Financial Implications: Maintaining an asset management reserve is integral to ensuring that Pickering can sustain its current levels of service over the long term. Funding for asset management reserves is usually achieved through special levies as part of the annual budget process. The 2023 City approved Budget included a 1.0 percent special levy for asset management. Every year, a large majority of municipalities have additional special levies for asset management that are in the one to two percent range. Over time, these annual increases will build up the asset management reserves where the municipality will be in a financial position to implement and replace critical assets without impacting services to the local residents. If the City finds that its Current Budget and reserves are insufficient to maintain these levels, it faces critical decisions. Without adequate reserves, the City may have to consider less favorable options such as increasing taxes, deferring capital projects, or reducing the quality or scope of services provided. By establishing and maintaining a robust asset management reserve, Pickering can avoid these difficult choices and ensure continuous, reliable service to its citizens. A general asset management reserve allows for consistent upkeep and improvement across various City services and infrastructures. This is essential for avoiding service disruptions and inefficiencies, and enables the city to handle unexpected challenges or emergencies without jeopardizing its financial stability or the quality of its services. Likewise, maintaining a balanced and well-managed reserve, the City can continue to attract investments and support its growth, thereby enhancing its economic prospects. Transparent management of the asset management reserve strengthens public trust, as it demonstrates the City's commitment to maintaining high service standards without imposing undue financial burdens on its residents. Aligning with best practices in asset management ensures that the city is well-positioned to meet its current and future obligations, avoiding the pitfalls of inadequate planning and inefficient resource allocation. Discussion: Determining capital investment priorities is a complex process requiring a careful balance of community needs, wants, preferences, technical requirements, strategic goals and other factors. Some are situational and can only be addressed in the moment, where others can and should be considered, weighted and analyzed well in advance. The intent of the Facility Renewal Study is to provide a framework through which predictable data-driven needs for asset management and capital investment in existing City buildings can be established. By comparing, weighing and prioritizing a uniform set of common factors, a rating scale has been developed that can help inform capital and strategic budgeting needs. This includes exploring whether each asset should be considered for renovation, replacement or disposal. Facility Condition Index (FCI) is a standard industry metric used as part of asset management and represents a simple ratio of deferred maintenance costs against the total replacement cost of the asset, over a fixed period of time. An FCI of 0.20,(or 20 percent, on a $10 million dollar building would mean that $2 million must be invested in capital repairs and replacement over a fixed period to keep the building in good condition. The City of Pickering typically works with a 5-year FCI window and currently has facilities assets worth a total of $300 million with an - 64 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 3 overall FCI of 0.28. This translates to $84 million in deferred maintenance over the next 5 years. While FCI is a key metric, it is only one of fifteen different factors that were reviewed, compared and weighted as part of the Facility Renewal Study. Factors specific to public-facing facilities were excluded in buildings that do not generally provide direct services interactions with the public at the facility, such as Fire Stations and the Operations Centre. In those cases, the total number of applicable factors was reduced from fifteen to ten. Staff from each department responsible for the operation of all city facilities participated in the scoring and weighting to achieve overall consensus. The top five weighted criteria established for these facility classifications are as follows: Fire Services & Operations Recreation & Culture 1. Emergency Response Role 1. Major Structural Repair Timelines 2. Operational Risk 2. Emergency Response Role 3. Facility Condition Index 3. Facility Condition Index 4. Financial Risk 4. Financial Risk 5. Existing Utilization 5. Operational Risk With the framework provided by the Facility Renewal Study established, it can serve as the backdrop to more specific evaluation of existing City assets. The following paragraphs summarize current initiatives, approaches and considerations for City Facilities, highlighting solutions that may already be in progress or where they may be required in the short to medium term. Where needs are identified, but no commitment has yet been determined, staff will initiate or continue ongoing discussions with key stakeholders in order to bring forth options for Council’s consideration as part of overall strategic planning. Animal Shelter The existing animal shelter is housed in a 250m2 two-storey, wood-frame structure located on land expropriated by the Federal government as part of land holdings for a potential future airport. The upper storey is unfinished and not suitable for use. Transport Canada manages the property. Through its lease agreement, the City is responsible for all capital repair, replacement and upgrades. Any capital investment in the asset would also become the property of Transport Canada. The building is undersized and poorly suited to its function and has been identified for replacement. Approximately $9.7 million in funding has already been approved for design and construction. Staff are presently working to secure a suitable property for the new animal shelter. - 65 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 4 Fire Stations The City maintains and operates five fire stations, including the new combined Fire Station 1 and Headquarters building that opened on Zents Drive in 2023. Other existing facilities are much older. Fire Station 5 (Bayly) was constructed in 1964 and has been earmarked for replacement with $465,000 already approved for design. Staff are presently searching for a suitable location that will maintain the required catchment areas and response times. Fire Station 2 (Kingston Road) was opened in 1977 and is due for major renovation in 2024, pending approval of construction funds included in this year’s Capital Budget. Station 4 (Claremont) and Station 6 (Finch Avenue) were constructed in 1997 and 1994, respectively, and are both reaching an age where lifecycle replacement of individual systems and components are expected. Related costs are reflected in the Capital Budget and forecast. Northern Community Centres With the exception of the Dr. Nelson F. Tomlinson Community Centre in Claremont, all of the City’s other northern community centres are repurposed buildings operated through third party lease agreements with local community associations. Greenwood Community Centre is the newest, after Tomlinson, having been opened in 1970. The others date back to the 19th century, or are at least 100 years old. All of these facilities have generally low and intermittent use. They are also all in need of major capital investment in order to renew and maintain, estimated to total over $5 million in capital costs over the next ten years. As the City’s growth pushes urban boundaries north, consideration should be given to consolidating service delivery in new facilities, such as the Seaton Recreation Complex, and the potential closure and disposal of aging assets that would require significant costs to restore and maintain. Southern Community Centres The East Shore Community Centre (ESCC) was originally built as an elementary school in 1951, with a series of additions over the last 70 years. It serves as the City’s vital and primary hub for seniors programming, but the overall building is reaching end of its serviceable life. A replacement facility has been proposed in the form of a Seniors and Youth Centre included in the Pickering City Centre development. Should no replacement be constructed in the next 5-10 years, significant capital investment will be required to address the gradual deterioration of the ESCC facility. Replacing the building on the same site is also possible, but would mean shuttering or displacing existing services during construction. George Ashe Library & Community Centre opened in 2000, and is starting to require lifecycle replacement of major systems and components. The City has made application to the Green and Inclusive Community Buildings grant program in order to help fund a potential renovation that could improve the facility’s energy efficiency while also addressing lifecycle needs. Approximately $740,000 has already been approved in capital funding for design and related projects which would be combined into a single scope of work for greater cost efficiency. Construction costs are included in 2026 in this year’s Capital Budget forecast. West Shore Community Centre is a smaller facility originally constructed in 1972. It remains in fair condition, but is beginning to show its age. Recent renovations and repairs have helped to extend its serviceable life, but consideration should be given to longer term intentions for this - 66 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 5 site and particular facility, which will likely reach end of life in the next 20 years. As with ESCC, redevelopment on the same property is possible, but would require suspending or displacing services to another site during construction. Pickering Museum Village The City does not track most of the historic exhibit buildings at the museum as facility assets, limiting its data inventory to the recently retrofitted Conservation Building, a prefabricated metal storage shed constructed on the upper site, both built in 2019. The Redman House Program Centre on the lower portion of the site is also included in the inventory, as it provides the central hub for washrooms, kitchen amenities and staff spaces. The City has received approximately $500,000 in grant funding for renovations to the Redman House, which are expected to begin construction later this year. Other historic structures on site do not easily fall into standard conventions for asset management analysis as all are typically beyond what would normally be considered their serviceable lives. Staff still separately monitor the conditions of these buildings, tracking and recommending renewal work where required. The Blacksmith shop was extensively renovated in 2021, for example, and additional work is currently being planned for the Miller Cole House and Brougham Temperance House. Rather than dealing with work on a piecemeal basis, the City has shifted to focusing its efforts on whole building restoration of one or two buildings each year. This helps allow museum staff to plan their seasonal programming around predictable closures without overstressing available resources. Indoor Aquatics Facilities The City maintains two indoor pools, with the largest located in the core of the Chestnut Hills Development Recreation Complex (CHDRC), built in 1983. The other is a smaller facility attached to Dunbarton High School, opened in 1972. Dunbarton Pool has benefited from several renovations in the last 15 years, and is currently in excellent condition, but its age and construction combined with the additional wear and tear of a humid pool environment inevitably take their toll. Key structural elements at Dunbarton Indoor Pool (DIP), are expected to be within their last 10 years of serviceable life. Given the age and use of the building, additional renovation is not expected to be practical or cost effective, meaning that replacement at this or another location will need to be considered. Dunbarton High School is of comparable age. The City should also be coordinating its intentions for DIP with the Durham District School Board (DDSB). Any work on the school portion of the building could impact DIP’s operations, including the potential for DDSB to consider renovation, replacement or closure. Minor repairs and upgrades have been completed on the pool at CHDRC over the years, but the space has never received a complete renovation, and could be considered overdue. A condition audit completed on this pool in 2023 identified several repairs required in the short term, which have been included in the 2024 budget. DIP is much smaller than the aquatics facilities at CHDRC, and could not accommodate full displacement of services, should it ever become necessary. it will be critical to ensure that new pool facilities at the Seaton Recreation Complex are opened in time to allow for the potential displacement of programming to that new - 67 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 6 facility, should more extensive renovation of the CHDRC pool be required. Any such work should also be considered against the overall remaining life of CHDRC as a whole. Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Opened in 1983, CHDRC is the City’s primary hub for indoor recreation programming, including two arenas, pools, indoor racquet sport courts, weight room, fitness studios, and other related amenities such as community rooms and a banquet hall. Approximately 21,000 m2 in size (230,000 sq. ft.), it is the largest single building asset in the City’s inventory and represents the largest overall need for capital dollars. Several additions have been attached to the building since it opened, with additional renovations most recently including Delaney Arena in 2015 and the main lobby and change rooms in 2021. Generally speaking, major structural components on a heavily used facility like CHDRC can reasonably be expected to last approximately 50-70 years before reaching end of life, depending on the various systems and materials involved. The shorter end of that timeline could be reached at CHDRC in about a decade. This timeline can potentially be extended, though it becomes increasingly expensive to do so. End of serviceable life of structural elements typically means a practical end of life for the building. Beyond a certain threshold, it simply becomes cost-prohibitive to reinvest in the asset. While CHDRC still has considerable life left, given the scale and costs to eventually replace a facility of this size, it would be prudent for the City to begin the long term planning for this eventuality. Don Beer Arena The City maintains five indoor ice rinks: two at CHDRC and three at Don Beer Arena (DBA), the latter built in phases in 1970, 1973 and 2003. All three rinks at DBA are coming due for replacement of their refrigerated slabs and aprons, representing major capital costs. Current projections estimate that over $20 million will need to be invested at DBA just to keep the facility in good condition over the next 10 years. As noted in the discussion on CHDRC, above, buildings over 50 years old are also typically considered to be reaching end of life for structure and other major building components. This is also the case at DBA, and is further complicated by lease costs. Most of the main parking lot at the rear of the facility is located within the adjacent hydro corridor owned and managed by Hydro One. The City pays approximately $100,000 a year for this lease, and these costs are expected to keep climbing. The property also has major stormwater drainage problems that could cost $3 million or more to resolve. Given the age and condition of this facility, and upon receiving the findings of the Arena Study and update to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan later in 2024, the City should consider whether it is practical to reinvest in this asset or better to replace its amenities at another location, potentially including the Seaton Recreation Complex. Civic Complex Built in 1990, the Pickering Civic Complex is home to the main branch library and City Hall. Now 34 years old, the building is in need of major renovations that have been deferred while the City explores other options in the City Centre. As any potential facility construction for the - 68 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 7 Pickering City Centre likely remains not yet known, renovations of key areas of the building have become unavoidable. Restoration of the central tower is most obviously required, as can be seen by its condition and appearance. Exposed structural members and metal roofs are all nearing end of life. Given the cost and operational impacts of this type of work, the most cost effective and least disruptive option would be to shroud the tower with scaffolding and repair all of the related systems and components at the same time. Renovation of the Council Chamber has also been given priority due to aging audio-visual infrastructure, poor accessibility, and identified needs for security and other improvements, including greater flexibility for future growth of Council should additional wards ever be established. Most other occupied areas within the Civic Complex are also in need of renovation, including staff offices. The building was constructed prior to computers and other IT-related equipment became standard in the workplace. Lighting should be converted to LED for energy savings. Improvements to accessibility, security and other practical operational needs should also be undertaken at the same time. The most cost effective and least disruptive approach is often to do as much work as possible in a single project. Staffing needs at City Hall have also outgrown available space and front line service counters and delivery require updating to meet current public needs and expectation, as well as positioning the City for future needs. Rather than continuously disrupting operations, staff recommend a holistic approach that temporarily closes parts of the building to gradually renovate it in phases. Temporary office space at another location would likely be required to accommodate displaced staff and services during construction. With respect to Libraries, an overall strategy for ongoing delivery of library services should also inform how best to repurpose, expand or relocate existing library space to meet residents’ needs. Any renovation to the existing library space might also require temporary relocation or service level reductions during construction. Benefits of New Assets While the Facilities Renewal Study and this report highlight various challenges related to older building assets, they also demonstrates how benefits can be found through good design and careful, considerate re-use. Many of the City’s existing facilities already benefit from extended serviceable life through tailored retrofit and renovation projects that also modernize public amenities and service delivery. These initiatives represent good use of public funds, corresponding to all of the priority objectives in the City’s recently approved Strategic Plan, most notably with regards to good governance. New facilities also have a role to play in overall asset management, whether as replacements to existing buildings or to meet the demands of a growing community. Beyond improving services and capacity, they also offer relief to the City’s overall Capital Budget needs as new buildings typically incur few capital costs during their first 10-20 years of operation. The new Fire Station 1 and Headquarters at Zents Drive completed in 2023, and Operations Centre on Clements Road completed in 2019 are both excellent examples, replacing aging assets and positioning the City to be ready for the future. - 69 - OPS 02-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Facilities Renewal Study Page 8 Attachment: 1.Facilities Renewal Study by PSD Citywide Inc., dated January 2024 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Vince Plouffe, OAA, MRAIC Brian Duffield Division Head, Operations Services Director, Operations Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer BD:vp Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 70 - Facilities Renewal Study January 2024 City of Pickering Attachment #1 to Report OPS 02-24 - 71 - Contents 1. Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Background ................................................................................................................................ 1 Key Study Question .............................................................................................................................. 1 Selected Study Goals ............................................................................................................................ 1 Project Constraints and Mitigations ........................................................................................................ 2 2. Evaluation Methods and Criteria ......................................................................................................... 3 Step 1: Strategic Goals & Document Alignment ....................................................................................... 4 Asset Management Policy ................................................................................................................... 4 Asset Management Plan (AMP) ........................................................................................................... 4 City of Pickering: Detailed 20 Year Population Forecast ......................................................................... 5 City of Pickering: Parks and Recreation Master Plan ............................................................................. 6 City of Pickering: Corporate Strategic Plan ........................................................................................... 6 Step 2: Investigate Best Practices .......................................................................................................... 8 Facility Condition Index (FCI): Background .......................................................................................... 8 BC Ministry of Education: Long Range Facilities Plan .......................................................................... 10 Facility Assessment Criteria: Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB) ................................ 11 Queen’s University, Campus Master Plan, Chapter 2: Existing Campus Conditions and Needs ................. 11 Toronto Lands Corporation Annual Plan ............................................................................................. 12 Step 3: Select Evaluation Attributes and Scoring Brackets ...................................................................... 13 Step 4: Determine Attribute Weighting ................................................................................................. 15 3. Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 17 4. Conclusions & Next Steps................................................................................................................. 18 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Appendix 1: Facilities in Scope of Study ................................................................................................... 24 Appendix 2: Attribute Scoring Ranges: All Facilities ................................................................................... 26 - 72 - Appendix 3: Attribute Scoring Ranges: Recreational Facilities .................................................................... 33 Appendix 3: Building Score Profile Page ................................................................................................... 38 Appendix 4: Financial Analysis for Disposal of "Test Facility" ...................................................................... 61 - 73 - 1 | Page 1. Overview The City of Pickering owns a variety of aging existing facilities that are required to support and deliver municipal operations and services. A total of 23 facilities were included in the study scope. The facility types are diverse in the functions they serve, and include fire stations, operations centers, recreation centers, and community and cultural buildings. In this study facilities are divided into two groups based on their function. These functions and the number of facilities and total square footage within are as follows: Facility Function Number of Facilities in Category Combined Building SQFT Recreation and Cultural Buildings 18 673,221 Fire and Operations Buildings 5 108,730 Total 23 781,951 Study Background The City of Pickering has a significant number of facilities, many of which are aging, either nearing the end of their serviceable life or requiring major capital reinvestment in order to remain suitable for use. Where demand is increasing and capacity is strained, renovation or addition may be a viable and responsible solution. In some cases, asset disposal (and reinvestment) may provide greater overall community benefits and reduced overall risk and liability than asset retention. Simultaneously, the City of Pickering is expected to experience significant population growth which will require infrastructure expansion, including new building assets. The cost of maintaining the existing portfolio and supporting the City’s growth would prove financially challenging to the City’s tax base. Therefore, investigating opportunities for asset disposal is of importance to the City. Key Study Question 1. Which facilities should the City of Pickering consider for asset disposal, renewal or replacement? a. What considerations are relevant to this question? b. How have these considerations been evaluated? Selected Study Goals 1. Evaluate a total of 23 facilities to determine their viability for long-term retention considering a variety of factors including financial, social benefits and need, and the assets physical state. Facilities in scope are detailed in Appendix 1. - 74 - 2 | Page 2. Identify a short-list of facilities as contenders for disposal, renewal or replacement. 3. Evaluate asset ownership considerations with a long-term view premised on sound asset management principles in alignment with related City Policies and strategic directions, namely the Strategic Plan, Asset Management Policy and their Asset Management Plan. Project Constraints and Mitigations The following are relevant project constraints and mitigations as applicable. When reviewing the data and information presented, these constraints should be considered. Constraints Mitigation Measures Relative Importance of Attributes: While all attributes selected are deemed of importance and relevance to the study question, some attributes have a greater significance to the study question. The relative importance of each attribute was systematically calculated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) analysis. Responses were aggregated and further weighted based on the number of facilities each respondent is responsible for managing. Data Limitation: Constraints in the availability, quality, and/or completeness of data. This project involved the engagement of a diverse group of staff with a combined total of over 50 years of experience at the municipality. Staff expertise offers crucial insights into relevant facility information, and by engaging numerous staff potential biases or inconsistencies are minimized. Further, by using scoring brackets (discussed in the next section), key states are identified without the need for precise information based on a linear (i.e. 0-100) rating scale. This combined approach fosters a more comprehensive and balanced decision-making process, where data is evaluated not only for its face value but also for its underlying reliability and contextual validity. This provides reasonable outputs while working within the constraints of available information and project schedules. - 75 - 3 | Page 2.Evaluation Methods and Criteria A four-step methodology was used to investigate the key study questions. These steps are highlighted below and discussed in more detail in the preceding sections. Step 1: Identify the City’s Strategic Goals and their Alignment to the Study Question o Strategic documents were identified and their connection to the study question was mapped. Please refer to ‘Step 1: Strategic Goals and Documentation Alignment’ for an overview of reviewed documents. Step 2: Investigate Best Practices for Facility Renewal vs. Replacement o A literature review on policy and practice in relation to asset disposal vs. retention consideration for other facility intensive organizations was conducted, providing insights as to how these might apply to the City of Pickering and the study question. o The literature review focused on entities governing similar assets owned and managed for the public good (i.e., Educational Boards and Universities) o Please refer to Section ‘Step 2: Investigate Best Practices’ for a summary of reference studies and a discussion of their relevance to the study question. Step 3: Select Evaluation Attributes and Scoring Brackets o Based on the information gathered in steps 1 and 2, evaluation attributes and preliminary definitions and scoring ranges were identified. These were provided to City of Pickering Staff by email and then presented and discussed during an in-person workshop conducted on November 17th, 2023. o Workshop attendees received information on the project problem statement, key study questions, relevant studies, reference materials and project methodology. Representatives from animal services, fire, operations, community services, and the library were in the morning session. Representatives from parks and recreation were in the afternoon session. o In the workshop, City of Pickering Staff reviewed the proposed attributes and their score ranges and definitions. Some attributes were removed, added, or otherwise adjusted to better reflect the City’s specific context; these changes are reflected in the finalized attributes and ranges as detailed in Appendix 2 and 3. o During the workshop, Staff provided input on the performance of each facility against the selected attributes. This produced a preliminary score for each building and its respective applicable attributes. Step 4: Determine Attribute Weighting o Recognizing that some attributes may be more significant than others and/or premised on data with varying degrees of accuracy. A weight for each attribute was determined using an Analytic Hierarchy Process. More details on this method are provided in Step 4: Determine Attribute Weighting. - 76 - 4 | Page Step 1: Strategic Goals & Document Alignment The City of Pickering is dedicated to advancing their asset management program alongside their strategic goals. Facilities are an important asset type to the City, its residents, and the realization of those strategic goals. Aligning the City’s strategic goals with its asset management practices is an important aid in their respective advancement. Such alignment is referred to by the Institute of Asset Management (IAM) as the “Line of Sight”. The following summarizes important and highly relevant City of Pickering policies and plans and outlines how they relate to the study question. City of Pickering Reference Material Asset Management Policy Asset Management Plan (AMP) Recreation Master Plan Detailed 20 Year Population Forecast Corporate Strategic Plan 2024-2028 Key details from the above noted reference reports that are of relevance and consideration to the problem statement and key study questions are summarized below: Asset Management Policy The Policy outlines the City’s commitment to the development and ongoing implementation of the asset management program. Procedures, roles, responsibilities, authority, and scope are outlined alongside 14 principles to be applied to asset management decisions. Principles that are of particular application to the study question include: A: Infrastructure planning and investment should take a long-term view B: Infrastructure planning and investment should consider any applicable budgets, fiscal restraint and fiscal plans H: Infrastructure planning and investment should be evidence based and transparent, and, subject to any restrictions or prohibitions under an Act of otherwise by law on the collection, use or disclosure of information. Asset Management Plan (AMP) The City’s Asset Management Plan outlines the condition of the City’s overall infrastructure assets, including its buildings. It details anticipated lifecycle activities and estimates long-term capital investment requirements. Of relevance to the study question is the lifecycle strategy methods deployed, including how investment is prioritized. It notes: Facility rehabilitation relies on determining the optimal time to replace components to minimize costs and manage risks without jeopardizing facility safety and operational standards. Staff prioritize rehabilitation needs into three broad categories: - 77 - 5 | Page ⮚ Primary: health & safety, roof replacement ⮚ Secondary: HVAC and electrical systems ⮚ Tertiary: cosmetics, lighting, cladding, flooring This provides context to how investment is prioritized and why a facility with a larger proportion of tertiary investment requirements may receive less investment than another building with a larger proportion of primary investment requirements. This prioritization method relates to the Major Structural Repair Timelines attributes, as defined in Appendix 2. The AMP also highlights qualitative risks for facility assets and highlights the importance of long-term strategic planning to ensure that they are suitable for the needs of the community in the present and future (page 74). The study question strongly relates to this risk and works to directly address it. City of Pickering: Detailed 20 Year Population Forecast This document details the long-term forecasted population increases for the City and, as applicable, the Region of Durham. General population and demographic trends expected in the Region of Durham are noted and the expected growth in residential units and population within the City of Pickering. The publication forecasts population based on active residential land development proposals and vacant readily developable residential lands. The forecasting models do not include potential redevelopment of lands currently zoned for other uses such as commercial plazas or the intensification of existing developed sites. The study includes data captured on December 31, 2022, from the 2021 Census, “Growing Durham: Our Future, Our Community”, the Region of Durham’s Implementation Study (2008), background work for the City Centre Official Plan Amendment 26, and the status of development applications received by the City as of the end of December 2022. The report includes neighbourhoods as defined in the Pickering Official Plan Urban Neighbourhood and Rural Settlement boundaries. From 2023 to 2042, 71,575 new residential units are expected to be built in the City of Pickering, primarily in the greenfield areas of Seaton and Duffin Heights, as well as the City Centre. Based on the anticipated growth in residential units, the City is expected to experience an increase in population of 90% from 2023 to 2042. This is equal to an average annual population increase of 5%. Most anticipated population growth is expected to take place in the areas of Seaton, the City Center, and Duffin Heights. These three areas are anticipated to account for 44%, 30%, and 10% of the population growth in Pickering between 2023 and 2042, respectively. The remaining 16% of anticipated population growth is attributed to maturation in other urban neighborhoods, the intensification proposed along Kingston Road (in line with the Kingston Road Corridor Intensification Study), and other developments. The study posits that, due to the aging of the Baby Boomer generation over the next 25 years, the persons per unit ratio is expected to continue to decline. Based on a declining persons per unit ratio, population decline is forecasted in aging neighbourhoods where there are limited infill opportunities; namely these neighbourhoods are: West Shore, Village East, Amberlea, and Liverpool. Given the continued aging of the Baby Boomer generation, it can be inferred that other generations such as Generation X and Millennials will occupy most of the new residential units. - 78 - 6 | Page The significant population growth projected can be expected to increase the usage and demand for the City’s existing facilities. Concurrently, it may affect some facilities more than others based on their location and/or facility function in relation to high areas of population growth. City of Pickering: Parks and Recreation Master Plan The City of Pickering’s 2017 Parks and Recreation Master Plan identifies what the community needs and prioritizes most, considering available financial resources. While the City is currently updating its Parks and Recreation Master Plan, findings from the 2017 version continue to offer important insights, context, and details to support and aid in the study question and evaluation methodology. The Master Plan was developed over four major steps: Context Review (1), Consultation (2), Draft Master Plan (3) and Finalized Master Plan (4). Some key findings from the plan, as they relate to facilities specifically, include: ●Aerobics and fitness, leisure swimming, and running or jogging were the third, fourth, and fifth most popular recreation activities and all require the use of facility assets in most instances. ●The third most important parks and recreation asset type identified by survey respondents was indoor recreation facilities. Respondents noted lower levels of satisfaction for indoor recreational facilities, suggesting that expectations are not currently being met. ●Facility based assets were the top third, fourth, and fifth priority for additional public spending for parks and recreation assets. ●Input from community groups noted several instances of facility specific items, including: o Need for updates and modernization to aging facilities and the importance of quality of spaces. o Ensuring that existing infrastructure supply is well maintained for efficient use of resources. ●Assessments indicated the need for two new recreation facilities to improve service levels and account for anticipated population growth. This finding was considered a medium-term priority item (4-6 years from 2017) The Master Plan underscores the importance of park and recreation assets to the City’s residents. It also highlights, in numerous instances, the need for facility expansion that is thoughtful in scope, scale, location, and cost. Cumulatively, the Master Plan supports the importance of the study question and provides valuable context to the City’s facility needs for both the present and future. City of Pickering: Corporate Strategic Plan The City of Pickering approved its first Corporate Strategic Plan on December 11, 2023. Recognizing the critical importance of this document, items of relevance to the study question are discussed for strategic alignment, context, and continuity. The Strategic Plan covers a 5-year period of 2024-2028 and fundamentally recognizes that strategic decisions are central to the City’s progress in the immediate and in the long term. Accordingly, it advocates and advances for proactive decision making centered around a long-term view. The plan was developed with significant consultation from key stakeholders including council, the community, business, partners, advisory committees, and City staff (via surveys and several engagement sessions). - 79 - 7 | Page The plan advances a vision, mission, and seven (7) corporate priorities that provide important direction to the City’s decisions. These are: Vision: Pickering: A complete, world class city… inclusive, connected, caring and prosperous. Mission: To provide meaningful municipal services to Pickering’s growing and diverse community efficiently, effectively, and responsibly. Good Governance and Customer Service Excellence was highlighted as a key priority as an overarching principle that guides all other priorities. Through public consultation, six (6) additional priorities were identified to support the vision, these actions are: 1. Champion Economic Leadership and Innovation 2. Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community 3. Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Supper a Connected, Well-Serviced Community 4. Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency 5. Strengthen Existing and Build New Partnerships 6. Foster an Engaged & Informed Community The study question – Which facilities should the City of Pickering consider for asset disposal, renewal, or replacement? – directly supports the identified priorities for the following reasons: ●Good Governance includes fiscal prudence and open and transparent decision making. The study question seeks to provide insights into which facilities may not be fiscally sustainable and/or safe in the years to come and the evaluation methods and stakeholder engagement process is objective and transparent. ●The City thoughtfully considers customer and service delivery through the evaluation of the study question which supports facility management and investment decisions that are responsive to the diverse needs of Pickering’s growing community. ●Responsible planning premised on actions that support a well-connected and serviced community are supported and advanced through the study question, directly advancing priority three. The City of Pickering is actively advancing the vision of its strategic plan by evaluating its facility assets and their long-term service delivery potential. This initiative directly advances and supports the City’s strategic decision-making focus that seeks to advance responsible, efficient and proactive city management. - 80 - 8 | Page Step 2: Investigate Best Practices Part two of the evaluation method focused on reviewing other government agencies’ best practices for facility investment and renewal decisions. This review provides valuable insights into how other organizations assess similar questions, including what attributes they consider, and which processes they follow. The following reports were reviewed: External Reference Material BC Ministry of Education: Long Range Facilities Master Plan Facility Assessment Criteria: Hamilton-Wentworth Queen’s University: Campus Master Plan, Chapter 2 Toronto Lands Corporation 2023-2023 Annual Plan Throughout the above referenced reports, the Facility Condition Index (FCI) metric is referenced. Before discussing the external reference material, FCI background is provided below: Facility Condition Index (FCI): Background The City of Pickering uses a software solution called VFA to manage their facilities data. Within the VFA system, every building, and the building components therein (e.g., Windows, Doors, Roof, Foundation) are identified including their installation date, estimated lifespan and projected replacement cost. This information helps the City project when each component can be expected to require investment. Adding all component costs together for a given asset also provides an estimated total replacement cost for that facility. A Facility Condition Index (FCI) score is a ratio of the total cost of identified building repairs and renewals (i.e., component replacement) over a defined period (the City uses 5 years) divided by the assets’ total estimated replacement cost. This calculation is illustrated below: The higher the FCI score the poorer the condition of the building. The FCI score will change over time as the required investments change; therefore, an FCI score is reported as of a specific date to reflect the costing date and the identified deficiencies as of that date. The FCI score does not consider or account for the type of building component. This means that a facility with a 10% FCI score may require investment for interior finishes only and another building also with an FCI score of 10% may require investment in more critical components like the elevators. Recognizing this, the FCI score is still an important tool to benchmark the built condition of a diverse group of facilities, such as is the case for the City of Pickering. The condition of a facility can be evaluated based on its FCI score. The City of Pickering uses the following scale as a measure of building condition based on FCI: - 81 - 9 | Page - 82 - 10 | Page BC Ministry of Education: Long Range Facilities Plan The British Columbia Ministry of Education has developed a Long-range Facilities Plan (LRFP) Guideline which outlines the considerations to be applied for the use of current and potential future inventory of capital assets. Like the study question, the objective of the LRFP is to evaluate the “Building condition and future maintenance requirements for existing schools, and whether to upgrade existing schools, to wholly replace existing schools, or to partially replace existing schools” (page 3). Information from the LRFP analysis is central to the Board of Education’s determination of the capital needs of its school district, including strategies for site acquisitions for new schools, retention, and upgrades to existing schools, and/or closures and disposal of school and surplus school properties. A series of key considerations for school districts are investigated when developing a LRFP. Several of these are also applicable to the City of Pickering. Those most relevant to the City of Pickering’s Study question are summarized below: LRFP Considerations & their Application to the Study Question School Board Consideration: Student Enrollment City of Pickering Application: Population Evaluates anticipated enrollment which dictates future demand for school space. The goal is to ensure that permanent space continues to be required for the entire physical life of the space. The need for facilities is most affected by the City’s current and expected future population. Population varies by neighborhood and wards and over time, and this may impact if an area is over or under- serviced. School Board Consideration: Existing Schools FCI Score City of Pickering Application: Existing Facilities FCI Score & Major Structural Repairs FCI as an indicator of the capital investment required to keep a facility in operational condition. In some cases, it may be more fiscally prudent to fund a full or partial replacement rather than the ongoing capital investment to an existing school. Understanding capital investments required to maintain facilities in a good state of repair is central to determining if the long-term retention of the asset is worthwhile. Exploring this question using FCI scores and associated data aligns with the City’s Strategic Priorities of Good Governance demonstrated by fiscal sustainability and infrastructure investment and renewal demonstrated by investment to current and future facilities that are responsive to the City’s growing community. School Board Consideration: Heritage Conservation City of Pickering Application: Adaptability Identifies schools with heritage conservation status which may impact if disposal is practically feasible. The City of Pickering, working with its Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, seeks to preserve all designated heritage properties, including those it owns. Where a building has heritage status, it is very constrained in how it can be adapted, and this may reduce its candidacy for disposal. - 83 - 11 | Page LRFP Considerations & their Application to the Study Question School Board Consideration: Capacity City of Pickering Application: Service Density Considers both the number of students that can be accommodated within a school based on the number of teachers (operating capacity) and the number of students a school can accommodate based on the notional number of students for hypothetical classes (Nominal capacity) The amount of recreational and cultural square feet per resident varies by ward; some wards have considerably more square feet per ward resident than the city average, while others have less. Therefore, buildings in wards that exceed the city’s average square feet per resident might be better candidates for removal since they are already overserviced while other wards would be poorer candidates since they are relative to the city average underserviced. School Board Consideration: Transportation of Students City of Pickering Application: Service Substitute Identifies the extent of travel required for students to access schools and whether associated costs are warranted. Considers how residents’ access to services may be impacted by the closure of facilities based on proximity of other comparable facilities. Facility Assessment Criteria: Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB) Like B.C.’s criteria, in Ontario, school boards like the HWDSB also evaluate their building inventory for long- term renewal needs and consider FCI scores. In this case, the FCI score receives the highest weighting of all factors (60%). When reviewing the FCI scores the intent is to maintain the portfolio in a generally consistent condition. One quarter of the consideration (25%) goes to factors representing equity and accessibility which review factors such as: whether there is an elevator, accessible washroom, a barrier-free entrance, and an all- gender washroom. The remaining weight (15%) goes to alignment to board mandated benchmarks which considers availability and quality of desired features (e.g., science labs, gyms etc.). When a property is no longer required for board use, it is deemed surplus by the Board of Trustees and can be sold at fair market value following an established procedure governed by Ontario Regulation 444/98. The HWDSB also follows the Property Disposition Procedure which ensures that the interests of the broader community in relation to the subject property is considered. The evaluation criteria, especially the use of FCI, are consistent with the evaluation criteria of other facility intensive organizations. Additional HWDSB considerations represent the specific mandates of the school board which reflect many of the values (e.g., accessibility, gender inclusivity, mandates) similar to those of the City of Pickering. Queen’s University, Campus Master Plan, Chapter 2: Existing Campus Conditions and Needs Queen’s University is a facility intensive organization and has developed a Campus Master Plan to guide the physical evolution of their campus for the next 10-15 years. Considerations include: o Land Utilization: identifies sites that are underutilized. - 84 - 12 | Page o Building Condition: evaluates condition based on FCI and classifies buildings with a high FCI score as candidates for redevelopment o Historic Significance: identifies buildings that must be protected or have key elements incorporated into any new development. o Development Capacity: This considers the site’s capacity for redevelopment based on financial and/or logistical constraints. Importantly, the Campus Master plan does not assume growth of the building inventory but instead identifies potential opportunities and constraints in the event of growth. Discussing renewal needs, the plan highlights the importance of balancing the creation of new spaces with the renovation of older spaces and the opportunity to eliminate outdated or poorly located amenities. While there are differences in the mandates, key objectives, and demographics served by Queen’s University and the City of Pickering, the facility management objective remains quite similar: to make wise decisions about facility assets that support existing and anticipated future needs. Therefore, it is of value and relevance to review the considerations of Queen’s University’s facility planning framework. Toronto Lands Corporation Annual Plan TLC is the exclusive real estate service provider for the Toronto District School Board (TDSB). TLC’s mandate is to represent the TDSB real estate interest in the redevelopment of sites, land use planning, property disposition and acquisition, leasing, partnerships, and integration of community hubs. TLC works to ensure students are accommodated in modern and innovative schools and works to preserve public assets where there is a demonstrated need. Specific evaluation criteria for asset disposal vs retention were not available for review, but the 2022-2023 Annual Plan does offer some insights into likely considerations. For example, to support the strategic goal of Transforming Student Learning Environment through the Modernization of Facilities strategies includes disposal of surplus sites, determination of capital investment requirements to achieve a desired FCI score, and portfolio risk assessment and ranking. Additionally, commitments are made to develop strategies and recommendations to address deteriorating non-instructional leased sites and to reevaluate the sites themselves. The Capital Plan makes notes of reinvestment of funds (presumably from asset disposal) to existing school sites. The available information suggests that like many other asset intensive organizations TLC uses FCI as a key consideration in decision making and seeks to carefully manage their investments by considering questions such as the study question: what facilities should be considered for asset disposal? - 85 - 13 | Page Step 3: Select Evaluation Attributes and Scoring Brackets Steps 1 and 2 provided important insights and context of the City’s strategic goals and asset management priorities and key considerations other asset intensive organizations hold when investigating asset retention vs. disposal decisions. This informed the preliminary selection and definition of evaluation attributes for the City of Pickering’s portfolio. Preliminary attributes and associated definitions and ranges was provided via email to the following group of staff: Staff Name Representative Departments Blaine Attwood, Supervisor, Capital Assets Operations & Engineering Services Vince Plouffe, Division Head, Operations Services Brian Duffield, Director, Operations Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development Elaine Bird, Director of Support Services, Pickering Library Pickering Library, Community Services, Corporate Services Laura Gibbs, (Acting) Director, Community Services Kevin Hayes, Manager, Facilities Maintenance Jason Litoborski, Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services Lindsey Narraway, Supervisor, Animal Services Shortly thereafter, the above noted staff attended an in-person workshop facilitated by PSD Citywide. Fire Services staff were invited to both workshops, but unable to attend. Workshop attendees received information on the project problem statement and key study questions, relevant studies and reference materials and project methodology. Representatives from Animal Services, Operations, Facilities Maintenance, and the Library were in the morning session. Representatives from Parks (Engineering) and Community Services were in the afternoon session. Through the workshop, the attributes were adjusted to better reflect the City’s specific goals, context, and priorities. In some cases, preliminary attributes were removed or added. In all cases, staff also reviewed the definitions and the scoring ranges. The workshop activities culminated in the finalization of the attributes selected, their definitions, scoring ranges, and respective scores. The selected attributes and the facilities they apply to are as follows: - 86 - 14 | Page Attribute Fire & Operations Recreational & Cultural FCI Score ✔ ✔ Major Structural Repair Timelines ✔ ✔ Proximate Hazard ✔ ✔ Site Servicing Reliability ✔ ✔ Exiting Utilization ✔ ✔ Safety & Inclusivity ✔ ✔ Accessibility ✔ ✔ Financial ✔ ✔ Operational ✔ ✔ Emergency Response ✔ ✔ Service Density ✔ Complexity of Ecosystem ✔ Service Substitute ✔ Service Priority ✔ Adaptability ✔ The scoring range definitions are provided in Appendix 2 and 3. This details the criteria a facility would need to meet to be placed in a respective score range and the number of points associated with that range. For every criterion, scores ranged from 0 to 5 with most having a criterion based assigned score of 1,3 or 5 representing a low, moderate, or high score. During the workshop, Staff provided input on the performance of each facility against the selected attribute. This produced a preliminary score for each building and its respective attributes. - 87 - 15 | Page Step 4: Determine Attribute Weighting Developed by Dr. Thomas L. Saaty in the 1970s, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) breaks down complex decisions into a hierarchical structure of objectives, criteria, and sub-criteria. AHP is a structured decision- making methodology that allows decision-makers to evaluate and rank multiple attributes based on their relative importance. By comparing these elements pairwise, decision-makers can assign weights to each attribute, ultimately leading to a prioritized ranking. Leveraging a mathematical approach, this methodology utilizes eigenvector calculations and consistency ratios to ensure the coherence and reliability of the rankings. AHP's versatility has made it a favored tool in various fields, as it provides a systematic and quantifiable approach to making informed decisions in scenarios with multiple competing attributes. All Staff engaged in the workshop independently completed an AHP analysis on November 28th, 2023. The results were then aggregated using AHP to determine each attribute's weighting. The final weightings and definitions for each attribute are as follows: Criteria General Attribute Definition Weight (%) Admin & Fire Recreational & Cultural Facility Condition Index (FCI) Total of all backlogs, current, and next five-year projected capital investment requirements divided by the asset’s total replacement cost. 11.96 11.66 Major Structural Repairs Timelines: Timeline of significant investment requirements to major and/or critical building components. 2.47 16.52 Proximate Hazards Subject property’s proximity to major hazards like the nuclear plant, major transportation corridors, and/or floodplains. 5.59 3.06 Site Servicing If the property is on well and/or septic systems compared to municipal water and wastewater services. 2.65 2.08 Existing Utilization Degree to which the facility is used by both staff and the public. 6.46 3.43 Accessibility Degree to which the facility is accessible. 5.52 4.37 Safety & Inclusivity The facility’s ease of access by public transit and depth of safety features. 3.04 2.2 Financial Cost of replacing the facility entirely in relation to the City’s existing budget frameworks. 10.52 9.96 Operational The impact of an unplanned closure of the facility on the city’s operations; considers availability of alternative facilities to accommodate. 12.23 9.91 - 88 - 16 | Page Criteria General Attribute Definition Weight (%) Admin & Fire Recreational & Cultural Emergency Response The buildings designation as a disaster support hub or primary response center 17.33 14.6 Service Density If the facility is in a ward with a square foot per capita rate that is lower or higher than the city average and how the disposal of the subject facility would impact the ward square footage per capita rate relative to the existing city average. N/A 2.18 Complexity of Ecosystem The number of uses the facility services and the impact of failure based on the number of uses. N/A 1.57 Service Substitute Number of alternative service providers within a 10- minute drive of the subject facility. N/A 6.31 Facility Service Priority The services provided by the subject facility and their importance to the City’s master plan and/or popular demand. N/A 7.4 Adaptability The facility’s design features and their ease of adaptation to support other services. N/A 4.73 Total 100% 100% - 89 - 17 | Page 3.Findings The following table details the overall score and rank for each facility in scope. Please refer to Appendix 3 for a building profile that outlines the score for each facility and all respective attributes. Facility FCI Score Rank Animal Services Shelter 0%1 4.96 1 Fire Station #5 51% 4.78 2 Fire Station #2 49% 4.26 3 Fire Station #4 38% 4.07 4 Fire Station #6 20% 3.82 5 Civic Complex 35% 3.73 6 Brougham Hall Community Centre 107% 3.55 7 Greenwood Community Centre 78% 3.44 8 Mount Zion Community Centre 59% 3.38 9 East Shore Community Centre 43% 3.26 10 Greenwood Library 58% 3.21 11 Dunbarton Pool 22% 3.11 12 Don Beer Arena 42% 3.11 13 Whitevale Community Centre 76% 3.11 14 Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex 26% 3.09 15 Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre 115% 3.05 16 Pickering Museum Village 14%2 3.02 17 Fire Station #1 0% 2.74 18 George Ashe Library & Community Centre 25% 2.65 19 Dr. Nelson F. Tomlinson Community Centre 28% 2.61 20 Operation Center 3% 2.40 21 West Shore Community Centre 36% 2.02 22 Pickering Soccer Centre 2% 1.91 23 This above ranking is not an absolute recommendation for asset disposal, renewal, or replacement. Rather, it provides an evidence-based summation of which facilities have the greatest potential need or take precedence based on the attributes explored and the data readily available at the onset of this project. Further investigation is recommended in general, and especially for facilities ranking within the top 10 as candidates for disposal. 1 This is a leased facility with no VFA data; however, the City is responsible for all capital upgrades and significant investment is required. Therefore, it is assumed that if there was an assessment the FCI score would be 50% or more and score of 5 would apply. 2 Historic pavilion structures are not included in the Museum FCI. This value only includes Redman House, the Conservation Building and Upper Site Storage Building. - 90 - 18 | Page 4.Conclusions & Next Steps This study has reviewed, evaluated, and established ratings by which to prioritize and consider where best to invest finite resources regarding existing City of Pickering facility assets. Its function is to inform staff and Council and serve as a basis for discussion for how to address the condition of an aging building inventory. Specific decisions or recommendations regarding each individual facility will depend on broader strategic priorities yet to be set. It is clear, based on the FCI ratings of the existing inventory, that significant reinvestment will be required, and that decisions are needed regarding whether it is in the City’s best interest to consider disposal, renewal or replacement for those assets approaching end of life. Where FCIs are particularly high and usage is low, consolidating services into new facilities enables the option to dispose of older assets in poor condition, using savings generated by eliminated deferred maintenance to offset capital costs for new construction. The City of Pickering, specifically, is challenged by limited redundancy in building stock for service deliver. For example, most of its indoor recreation amenities are located in a single location at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation complex, which is already 40 years old. The City’s only other aquatic facility at Dunbarton Indoor Pool (DIP) is over 50 years old and nearing the end of its serviceable life. DIP also lacks the capacity to make up for the loss of the CHDRC pool, affecting the strategic prioritization for repairs which could otherwise lead to an unacceptable reduction in service to the public. A roadmap is required in order to address how and when to address end of life for facilities, especially considering that it often takes 6-10 years or more for municipalities to plan and complete major new facilities. In order to provide more detailed recommendations, further investigation and direction will be required regarding the City’s near and long term strategic priorities. The metrics and background information provided in this report should help to inform and guide how to prioritize and consider those key decisions. Several enhancements to the extent and quality of the existing attribute data collected to date could also be beneficial to obtain. Some information was unavailable for this study but is recognized for the value it could provide in addressing the study question. The following sections detail additional data and enhancements that are recommended as a potential second phase of the study or should at minimum be considered as future plans and strategies are developed. Doing so would provide for an even more rigorous analysis and a higher level of confidence and conclusiveness to the findings of this study. Recommended Additional Data Collection for Existing Attributes: Facility Condition Index (FCI): ●Full Cost of Ownership: o Operating costs typically account for over 80% of the cost of ownership of a building over its full life with a tendency to increase gradually as buildings age. Multiple approaches can be taken with regards to facility management, including how to address maintenance and repairs, each carrying different risks and potential benefits from cost and level of service perspectives. ●Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Building Components: o Different components of a building have varying lifespans and maintenance needs. A lifecycle cost analysis involves evaluating these components individually — such as roofing, HVAC - 91 - 19 | Page systems, structural integrity, plumbing, and electrical systems. Understanding when each component is likely to require repair or replacement can significantly influence the FCI based on the component’s level of criticality. The City’s planning horizon for capital replacements has traditionally been forecasted out to 5 years in the future. Its 2024 capital budget and forecast will increase that forecast lens to 10 years. The City could benefit from a more rigorous long term analysis of capital needs that should also work hand in hand with growth projections to be better prepared to meet future needs. Major Structural Repairs Timelines: ●Cost-Benefit Analysis of Major Repairs vs. Replacement: o Comparing the long-term costs of major repairs against the cost of a full replacement of structural components or the entire facility. This analysis should factor in not only direct repair costs but also indirect costs like operational disruptions and efficiency losses. Many existing City facilities are nearing the end of their serviceable lives and decisions must be made to prepare for their disposal and replacement, should renewal no longer be a viable option. Discussions should be starting now for any facilities that have 15 years or less of remaining anticipated useful life. Proximate Hazards: ●Service Redundancy and Emergency Management o As a host community to a nuclear power generating station and with major highways and other transportation infrastructure corridors physically separating parts of the community, a degree of consideration and planning must be devoted to considering the City’s ability to respond in case of catastrophe or for major emergency management needs. Public facilities typically serve as shelters, support hubs or even large scale morgues. Critical infrastructure planning aims to provide backups to key locations and services, should their primary sources be unavailable for any reason. The City’s Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) is currently located at City Hall, for example, with the Dr.Nelson F. Tomlinson Community Centre in Claremont service as a backup site. The City could benefit from a review of its existing amenities and available redundancies to determine if additional provisions are required, so that they can be planned for well in advance and implemented when opportunities arise. Site Servicing: ●Infrastructure Constraints o Many of the City’s northern and remote facilities rely on well and septic systems, or lack access to utilities such as natural gas. Servicing limitations can impose limitation on the potential for growth and adaptation to meet future demands, ultimately preventing existing buildings from being adapted to their evolving uses and the needs of the community. Coordination with broader planning and civil infrastructure initiatives can help mitigate these risks, as well as further analysis to determine where finite potential exists or the required financial investment cannot be justified. ●Potential Technological Upgrades and Innovations: o Evaluating the potential for integrating new technologies or innovative approaches to improve site servicing. This could include advanced water and wastewater treatment methods, energy- - 92 - 20 | Page efficient systems, or smart monitoring technologies. The City is currently undertaking workplace modernization initiatives for technology solutions and will expand those efforts to include physical workplace improvements and efficiencies in 2024. Both initiatives required constant re-evaluation and can dramatically impact building needs and expectations. Existing Utilization Rates: ● Detailed Usage Statistics: o Collecting comprehensive data on facility usage. This would include tracking the number of users, the frequency of use, and the specific activities or services being utilized. Data should be segmented by different user groups (like age groups, special interest groups) to understand diverse needs and preferences. Some of this data is already available, but was not included in the scope of this study. ● Peak and Off-Peak Usage Analysis: o Analyzing usage patterns during different times of the day, week, or year. Identifying peak times can help in understanding the highest demand periods and planning for capacity management. Off-peak analysis can reveal underutilization issues and opportunities for promoting the facility during less busy times. This same data is often essential when considering energy management and seeking usage and performance-based operating efficiencies. Accessibility: ● Comprehensive Audits of Current Accessibility Standards: o Conduct thorough audits to assess the facility's compliance with current accessibility standards. This includes evaluating entryways, corridors, restrooms, signage, elevators, and any other public areas. The audit should check for adherence to legal requirements, such as those outlined in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) or other relevant local and national standards. Safety and Inclusivity: ● Detailed Safety Audit Reports: o Conduct thorough safety audits covering all aspects of the facility. This includes assessing fire safety (like alarms, sprinklers, escape routes), security measures (such as CCTV, access control), and structural integrity. The audits should identify potential hazards and recommend measures to mitigate them. This is currently done on an as-needed basis without any set Corporate standards or objectives beyond those required by applicable law or immediate operational needs. ● Inclusivity Assessments: o Perform evaluations to determine how inclusive the facility is. This goes beyond basic accessibility and looks at whether the facility caters to the diverse needs of different groups, including various age groups, cultural backgrounds, and people with different abilities. Inclusivity assessments should consider factors like language options, cultural sensitivity in - 93 - 21 | Page design and services, and spaces that accommodate a variety of activities and group sizes. Regularly consult with key stakeholder groups to obtain feedback. Emergency Response: ●Emergency Capacity: o Assess the maximum number of individuals the facility can safely accommodate during an emergency. This includes evaluating space for emergency shelters, medical facilities, and support services. Fire Services are currently preparing a master plan to identify their specific needs. Facility Service Priority: ●Alignment with City's Master Plans: o Evaluate how the services offered by each facility fits into the broader goals and objectives outlined in the City of Pickering's master plan. This includes assessing whether the facility supports key initiatives, such as community development, recreation, and/or environmental sustainability. ●Demand Analysis: o Analyze the current and projected demand for the services provided by the facility. This can be done through community surveys, usage data, and trend analysis. Understanding which services are most in demand helps prioritize facilities that offer these services. Refreshing the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan, currently underway, is an excellent example of this principle in action. Recommended Additional Considerations: ●Environmental Impact Assessment: o Energy efficiency ratings, carbon footprint, waste management practices, and water usage statistics. These types of strategic initiatives are included in the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan, last updated in 2019 and due for renewal in 2024. ●Community Engagement Feedback: o Surveys and focus group findings on user satisfaction, needs assessment, and community preferences for facility services and design. Gathering data on historical usage patterns by different community groups can also provide insights into inclusivity and accessibility. The City already regularly collects this information, with additional stakeholder consultation as part of all major capital project planning. ●Resilience to Climate Change: o Climate risk assessments, flood zone mapping, and historical data on weather-related damages. Assessments of existing infrastructure resilience to extreme weather events are crucial. The City already participates in Durham Region’s Climate Resiliency round table, along with other lower tier municipalities. ●Demographic Shifts Analysis: o Census data, population growth projections, and demographic trend analysis. Understanding shifts in age groups, family structures, and cultural backgrounds can guide future facility - 94 - 22 | Page needs. City Development staff already collect and serve as an invaluable resource to other departments in this regard. Use of emerging technology, including growing capabilities in the use of GIS have further enhanced and refined available tools. ●Economic Impact Analysis: o Local economic contribution, employment statistics related to the facility, and analysis of the facility’s role in attracting businesses or tourists. ●Financial Analysis o An example is provided in Appendix 4. - 95 - 23 | Page Bibliography British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care. (2019). Long-Range Facilities Plan Guidelines. Accessed online at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/administration/resource-management/capital- planning/archive/long-range_facilities_plan_guidelines_-_march_2019_pdf.pdf City of Pickering. (2023). City of Pickering - Draft Corporate Strategic Plan 2023-2027. Accessed online at: https://ehq-production-canada.s3.ca-central- 1.amazonaws.com/cb08e7cb8cdbcdc2e0f2c371f6487580f9b82fed/original/1698781333/fef8e87ed8b6a 3b07b87902862728e38_Draft_Corporate_Strategic_Plan_.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC- SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA4KKNQAKIOR7VAOP4%2F20231113%2Fca-central- 1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20231113T160638Z&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz- SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz- Signature=234ac62bf52394b1b02aaa248abde1ebb844ba815651d4f10a32d53ab13dab43 City of Pickering. (2017). City of Pickering Recreation & Parks Master Plan. Accessed online at: https://www.pickering.ca/en/living/resources/2017-recreation-parks-master-plan-acc.pdf City of Pickering, City Development Department. (2023). City of Pickering Detailed 20 Year Population Forecast. Accessed online at: https://www.pickering.ca/en/business/resources/20YearPopulationForecastACC.pdf Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board. (2023). 2023 Long-Term Facilities Master Plan Section 1.3: HWDSB Property. Accessed online at: https://www.hwdsb.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/LTFMP-1.3- Property-2023.pdf Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board. (2023). 2023 Long-Term Facilities Master Plan Section 1.5: Facility Assessment. Accessed online at: https://www.hwdsb.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/LTFMP-1.5- Facility-Assessment-2023.pdf Toronto Lands Corporation. (2022). TLC Annual Plan 2022-23. Accessed online at: https://torontolandscorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-23-TLC-Annual-Plan.pdf - 96 - 24 | Page Appendix 1: Facilities in Scope of Study Facility Name Facility Address Facility Type Fire Station #2 553 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 3N7 Fire & Operations Fire Station #5 1616 Bayly Street, Pickering, ON L1W 3N2 Fire Station #6 1115 Finch Avenue, Pickering, ON L1V 1J7 Fire Station #1 Zents Road Pickering, ON Operation Center 1955 Clements Road, Pickering ON, L1W Brougham Hall 3545 Brock Road, Brougham, ON L0H 1A0 Recreation & Cultural Civic Complex One The Esplanade, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dr. Nelson F. Tomlinson Community Centre and Fire Station #4 4941 Old Brock Road, Claremont, ON L1Y 1A9 Don Beer Arena 940 Dillingham Road, Pickering, ON L1W 1Z6 Dunbarton Pool 655 Sheppard Avenue E., Pickering, ON L1V 1G2 East Shore Community Centre and East Shore Senior Citizens Centre 910 Liverpool Road, Pickering, ON L1W 1S6 Greenwood Community Centre 3551 Greenwood Road, Greenwood, ON L0H 1E0 Greenwood Library 3540 Westney Road, Greenwood, ON L1H 1H0 Mount Zion Community Centre 4230 Sideline 6, Pickering, ON L1Y 1A2 George Ashe Library & Community Centre 470 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 1A4 Animal Services Shelter 1688 Highway 7, Brougham, ON L0H 1A0 Pickering Museum Village 2365 Concession #6, Greenwood, L0H 1H0 Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex 1867 Valley Farm Road, Pickering, ON L1V 3Y7 Pickering Soccer Centre 1975 Clements Road, Pickering, ON, L1W 4C2 - 97 - 25 | Page Facility Name Facility Address Facility Type West Shore Community Centre 1011 Bayly Street, Pickering, ON L1W 0A4 Recreation & Cultural Whitevale Community Centre 405 Whitevale Road, Whitevale, ON L0H 1M0 Operations Center 1955 Clements Road, Pickering ON, L1W Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre 475 Whitevale Road, Whitevale, ON L0H 1M0 - 98 - 26 | Page Appendix 2: Attribute Scoring Ranges: All Facilities Facility Condition Index (FCI) High Score (5 points) Medium Score (1-3) Low Score (1 or less) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o The FCI score is .50 or greater o The FCI is less than .50 and greater than 0.17. o The FCI score is multiplied by two and then multiplied by 3 to determine the score. o The FCI is less than 0.17. o The FCI score is multiplied by two and then multiplied by 3 to determine the score. Major Structural Repair Timelines High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Significant investments to major and/or critical building components are required in the next 5-10 years Significant investments to major and/or critical building components are required in the next 11-20 years o Significant investments to major and/or critical building components are required but not for about 20 years - 99 - 27 | Page Proximate Hazards High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure One or more of the following applies: o Subject property is within the Nuclear Plant exclusion zone (less than 5 km radius from plant) o Subject property is within 500 meters of a major transportation corridors (commercial rail, HWY) o Subject property is within 100 meters of a water body One or more of the following applies: o Subject property is within five (5) KM radius of the Nuclear Plant exclusion zone. o Subject property is within one (1) kilometer of a major transportation corridors (commercial rail, HWY) o Subject property is within a floodplain. One or more of the following applies: o Subject property is not within the nuclear plant exclusion zone. o Subject property is not within one (1) kilometer of a major transportation corridors (commercial rail, HWY) o Subject property is not within a floodplain Site Servicing High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Subject property is on well and/or septic o Subject property is on a shared septic and/or well system o Subject property is on municipal water and sewage services - 100 - 28 | Page Existing Utilization High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Considers utilization of both staff and the public o The facility experiences extreme utilization rates, either being underutilized to a concerning degree or being overwhelmed with demand, both of which are detrimental. o Very low utilization suggests that the facility might be redundant or not meeting community needs, leading to wasted resources and potential financial strain. On the other hand, very high utilization can result in wear and tear, reduced service quality, and potential safety concerns. o Seasonal fluctuations exacerbate these extremes, with certain periods seeing a drastic drop in usage, while others might witness an unsustainable surge, further complicating management, and maintenance strategies. o Considers utilization of both staff and the public o The facility has variable utilization rates, with occasional periods of low or high demand, but generally maintains a balanced usage pattern. o While it doesn't face the extreme challenges of Level 1, there are still periods, especially during specific seasons, where adjustments are needed to optimize service delivery and manage resources. o Seasonal changes might require proactive planning to ensure that the facility remains functional and efficient throughout the year, without significant disruptions. o Considers utilization of both staff and the public o The facility enjoys a steady and balanced utilization rate, neither being underused nor overwhelmed, ensuring efficient service delivery and resource management. o While there might be minor fluctuations due to seasonality, these are anticipated and managed effectively, ensuring that the facility remains responsive to community needs. o The facility's utilization pattern is a testament to its adaptability and effective management, allowing it to cater to demands consistently, regardless of seasonal changes. - 101 - 29 | Page Accessibility High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Facility does not meet accessibility requirements o Facility’s first floor fully complies with accessibility requirements o Facility is fully compliant with accessibility Safety & Inclusivity High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Facility does not have safety infrastructure components in place (e.g., CCTV, alarms, lighting systems) o Facility has noted deficiencies in universal design. o Facility is not connected to transit o The facility has some safety infrastructure in place. o Facility meets some universal design requirements. o Facility is within 300 m - 500 m from a transit stop o Facility has comprehensive safety infrastructures in place. o The facility meets universal design requirements. o Facility is adjacent to a transit stop (<300 m) - 102 - 30 | Page Financial Risk High Score (1 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (5 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Total replacement cost is greater than $15M o Rebuilding the building would require a significant portion of the city's annual budget or would necessitate external financing or borrowing. o The financial strain could lead to budgetary adjustments in other city projects or services. o Does not consider revenue generation from the facility o Total replacement cost is greater than $5M and less than $15M o Rebuilding the building would be a noticeable expense but could be managed within the city's existing budget framework, possibly with some reallocations. o The city might delay or adjust some non-essential projects to accommodate the rebuilding cost. o Does not consider revenue generation from the facility o Total replacement cost is less than $5M o Rebuilding the building would have a comparably minimal impact on the city's finances, with costs easily absorbed without major budgetary changes. o The building might be a smaller commercial outlet, a standalone residence, or a non-essential municipal structure. o The city can manage the rebuilding cost without significant financial adjustments. o Does not consider revenue generation from the facility - 103 - 31 | Page Operational Risk High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Assumption: closure is required for at least 30 consecutive days o The building's failure necessitates the relocation of a significant number of city staff or city liabilities (i.e., animal services), disrupting core municipal services. o There's a lack of readily available alternative locations, leading to delays in resuming normal operations. o Critical departments, such as emergency services, public utilities, or administrative offices, are affected. o The city faces challenges in communication, coordination, and service delivery, leading to public dissatisfaction and potential safety concerns o Assumption: closure is required for at least 30 consecutive days o The building's failure affects some departments, requiring a partial shift of staff and resources. o Alternative locations are available, but they might not be fully equipped or might be located at a distance, causing some operational delays. o Non-critical departments, such as cultural services, recreational facilities, or secondary administrative offices, are impacted. o Assumption: closure is required for at least 30 consecutive days o The building's failure has a minimal impact on the city's operations, with only a small number of staff affected. o Suitable alternative locations are readily available, ensuring a swift transition with minimal disruption. o Peripheral departments or services, such as storage facilities, non-essential workshops, or seasonal operations, are affected. - 104 - 32 | Page Emergency Response High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o The building is designated as a Primary Response Centre + Disaster Support Hub. o Its failure poses immediate threats to the lives and well-being of occupants, city staff, and nearby residents. o The city's primary ability to coordinate emergency responses, manage disasters, and provide shelter during crises is severely compromised. o The building is designated as a Disaster Support Hub. o Its failure presents health and safety concerns, but they are not immediately life-threatening. o The city's secondary ability to provide support during disasters is affected, leading to potential delays or disruptions in aid and services. o The building is not designated as a Disaster Support Hub or Primary Response Centre o Its failure has minimal direct health and safety implications. o The city's emergency response capabilities remain largely unaffected, though some resources might be redirected for assessment and repair. - 105 - 33 | Page Appendix 3: Attribute Scoring Ranges: Recreational Facilities Note: These attributes apply to recreational facilities, in addition to the attributes outlined in Appendix 2. Service Density3 High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o Facility is in a ward with a sqft/Capita that is higher than the city average. The facility's disposal will not result in a sqft/capita that is less than the current city average (6.75) o Its failure would significantly exacerbate the service deficiency in the area, leading to overcrowding in alternative facilities or lack of access to essential community services. o Residents might face challenges in accessing recreational, educational, or social programs, leading to potential community dissatisfaction and reduced quality of life. o Facility is in a ward with a sqft/Capita that is higher than the city average (6.75 sqft/capita). The facility's disposal will result in a sqft/capita that is less than the current city average. o Its failure would impact the specific neighborhood’s service density, placing strain on nearby community centres and potentially leading to localized service disruptions. o The broader area might be able to absorb some of the service demand, but residents of the affected neighborhood could face inconveniences. o Facility is in a ward with sqft/capita that is lower than the city’s current overall average (6.75 sqft/capita). o Its failure would have a minimal impact on the overall service density, as the service level is already aligned with the optimal target. o Nearby facilities and centres can likely accommodate the displaced services and activities with minimal disruptions. 3 It is recognized that asset disposal is most often combined with the construction or acquisition otherwise of a replacement facility. - 106 - 34 | Page Complexity of Ecosystem Risk High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o The facility has more than 2 recreational or cultural uses o Its failure would disrupt a multifaceted ecosystem of services, impacting a wide range of community activities and cultural programs. o The interconnected nature of these services means that the failure of one facility could have cascading effects on the operations of the co- located services. o The facility has 2 recreational or cultural uses. o Its failure would impact a significant portion of the community's recreational or cultural activities, but the disruption is somewhat localized to the specific co- located service. o The facility has a single recreational or cultural use. o Its failure would have a more limited impact on the community's activities, but there are still considerations due to other co-location synergies. - 107 - 35 | Page Service Substitute High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o There are no alternative services available within a 10-minute drive of the facility. o If this facility were to fail, it would create a significant service gap in the community, compelling residents to travel much further to access services. o The absence of nearby alternatives means the community would face substantial interruptions in accessing essential services. o Some alternative services, provided by the private sector or other municipalities, are within a 10-minute drive of the facility. However, these alternatives might not match the breadth, quality, or cost of the services offered by the original facility. o In the event of its failure, residents would face disruptions but would have some other options, even if these are not entirely equivalent in terms of service or cost. o Multiple service providers are within a 10-minute drive of the Facility. o A failure of the facility would have a minimal impact on the community's access to services, as residents have a variety of options to consider. - 108 - 36 | Page Service Priority Low Score (1 point) Medium Score (3 points) High Score (5 points) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o The facility hosts key programs and services that are central to the city's master plan and have a high popular demand. o Its failure would disrupt strategic initiatives and long-term planning goals, potentially affecting a large portion of the community. o The facility might be known for unique programs, events, or services that aren't easily replicated elsewhere in the city. o The facility offers programs and services that align with the city's master plan and have a moderate level of popular demand. o Its failure would lead to some disruptions, but there might be other facilities in the city that offer similar programs, albeit with potential capacity constraints. o The facility provides programs and services that, while valuable, might not be central to the city's master plan or have a lower level of popular demand. o Its failure would have a more limited impact on the community's access to services, as residents might have other options or be willing to wait for the facility's restoration. - 109 - 37 | Page Adaptability Risk High Score (5 points) Medium Score (3 points) Low Score (1 point) High Consequence of Failure Moderate Consequence of Failure Low Consequence of failure o The facility has a highly specialized design, making it challenging to adapt for other services without significant modifications. o Repurposing this facility would require extensive renovations, potentially involving structural changes, to accommodate different service needs. o The intricate nature of its design means that any attempt to diversify its use would be time-consuming and costly, limiting its flexibility for alternative service delivery. o The facility has a semi- specialized design, allowing for some flexibility in its use, but still necessitating modifications to cater to different services. o While it can be repurposed with moderate effort, certain design elements might pose challenges in seamlessly transitioning to a new service delivery model. o The design's moderate complexity means that while repurposing is feasible, it would still involve a considerable investment of time and resources. o The facility boasts a versatile design, making it relatively easy to adapt for various services with minimal changes. o Its flexible structure and layout mean that it can quickly transition to deliver different services, maximizing its utility and adaptability. o The straightforward nature of its design ensures that repurposing efforts would be efficient and cost- effective, offering a wide range of service delivery options. - 110 - 38 | Page Appendix 3: Building Score Profile Page Facility Name: Animal Services Shelter Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score4 0% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard Low 1 0.031 0.031 Site Servicing Reliability Moderate 3 0.021 0.062 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational High 5 0.099 0.496 Emergency Response High 5 0.146 0.730 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes High 5 0.063 0.316 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 4.96 Rank 1 4 This is a leased facility with no VFA data; however, the City is responsible for all capital upgrades and significant investment is required. Therefore, it is assumed that if there was an assessment the FCI score would be 50% or more and score of 5 would apply. - 111 - 39 | Page Facility Name: Brougham Hall Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 107% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Moderate 3 0.021 0.062 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 3.55 Rank 7 - 112 - 40 | Page Facility Name: Chestnut Hills Developments Recreation Complex Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 26% 1.56 0.117 0.182 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity Low 1 0.022 0.022 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial High 1 0.100 0.100 Operational Moderate 3 0.099 0.297 Emergency Response Moderate 3 0.146 0.438 Service Density Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Complexity of Ecosystem Moderate 3 0.016 0.047 Service Substitutes High 5 0.063 0.316 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability High 5 0.047 0.237 Total Score 3.09 Rank 15 - 113 - 41 | Page Facility Name: Civic Complex Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 35% 2.1 0.117 0.245 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial High 1 0.100 0.100 Operational High 5 0.099 0.496 Emergency Response High 5 0.146 0.730 Service Density Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Complexity of Ecosystem High 5 0.016 0.078 Service Substitutes High 5 0.063 0.316 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 3.73 Rank 6 - 114 - 42 | Page Facility Name: Don Beer Arena Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 42% 2.52 0.117 0.294 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Moderate 3 0.021 0.062 Existing Utilization Low 1 0.034 0.034 Safety & Inclusivity Low 1 0.022 0.022 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial High 1 0.100 0.100 Operational Moderate 5 0.099 0.496 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Moderate 3 0.063 0.189 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability High 5 0.047 0.237 Total Score 3.11 Rank 13 - 115 - 43 | Page Facility Name: Dr. Nelson F. Tomlinson Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 28% 1.68 0.117 0.196 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Moderate 3 0.146 0.438 Service Density Low 1 0.022 0.022 Complexity of Ecosystem High 5 0.016 0.078 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 2.61 Rank 20 - 116 - 44 | Page Facility Name: Dunbarton Pool Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 22% 1.32 0.117 0.154 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Moderate 3 0.021 0.062 Existing Utilization Low 1 0.034 0.034 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility Moderate 3 0.044 0.131 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Moderate 5 0.099 0.496 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Low 1 0.022 0.022 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Moderate 3 0.074 0.222 Adaptability High 5 0.047 0.237 Total Score 3.11 Rank 12 - 117 - 45 | Page Facility Name: East Shore Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 43% 2.58 0.117 0.301 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Accessibility Moderate 3 0.044 0.131 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Moderate 3 0.099 0.297 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Low 1 0.022 0.022 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 3.26 Rank 10 - 118 - 46 | Page Facility Name: Fire Station #1 Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 0% 0 0.120 0.000 Major Structural Repair Timelines Low 1 0.247 0.247 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.056 0.168 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.065 0.194 Safety & Inclusivity Low 1 0.030 0.030 Accessibility Low 1 0.055 0.055 Financial Moderate 3 0.105 0.315 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 2.74 Rank 18 - 119 - 47 | Page Facility Name: Fire Station #2 Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 49% 2.94 0.120 0.352 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.247 0.741 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.056 0.168 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.065 0.194 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.030 0.152 Accessibility High 5 0.055 0.276 Financial Low 5 0.105 0.526 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 4.26 Rank 3 - 120 - 48 | Page Facility Name: Fire Station #4 Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 38% 2.28 0.120 0.273 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.247 0.741 Proximate Hazard Low 1 0.056 0.056 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.065 0.194 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.030 0.152 Accessibility High 5 0.055 0.276 Financial Low 5 0.105 0.526 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 4.07 Rank 4 - 121 - 49 | Page Facility Name: Fire Station #5 Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 51% 5 0.120 0.598 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.247 1.235 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.056 0.280 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.065 0.194 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.030 0.091 Accessibility High 5 0.055 0.276 Financial Moderate 3 0.105 0.315 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 4.78 Rank 2 - 122 - 50 | Page Facility Name: Fire Station #6 Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 20% 1.2 0.120 0.144 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.247 0.741 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.056 0.168 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.065 0.194 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.030 0.091 Accessibility Moderate 3 0.055 0.166 Financial Low 5 0.105 0.526 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 3.82 Rank 5 - 123 - 51 | Page Facility Name: George Ashe Library & Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 25% 1.5 0.117 0.175 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Moderate 3 0.099 0.297 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Low 1 0.022 0.022 Complexity of Ecosystem Moderate 3 0.016 0.047 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 2.65 Rank 19 - 124 - 52 | Page Facility Name: Greenwood Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 78% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 3.44 Rank 8 - 125 - 53 | Page Facility Name: Greenwood Library Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 58% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity Low 1 0.022 0.022 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Moderate 3 0.063 0.189 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 3.21 Rank 11 - 126 - 54 | Page Facility Name: Mount Zion Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 59% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard Low 1 0.031 0.031 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 3.38 Rank 9 - 127 - 55 | Page Facility Name: Operations Center Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 3% 0.18 0.120 0.022 Major Structural Repair Timelines Low 1 0.247 0.247 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.056 0.280 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.026 0.026 Existing Utilization Low 1 0.065 0.065 Safety & Inclusivity Low 1 0.030 0.030 Accessibility Low 1 0.055 0.055 Financial High 1 0.105 0.105 Operational High 5 0.122 0.612 Emergency Response High 5 0.173 0.867 Total Score 2.40 Rank 21 - 128 - 56 | Page Facility Name: Pickering Museum Village Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 14% 0.84 0.117 0.098 Major Structural Repair Timelines High 5 0.165 0.826 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability Moderate 3 0.021 0.062 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility Moderate 3 0.044 0.131 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority High 5 0.074 0.370 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 3.02 Rank 17 Note: FCI is based on Upper Site Storage Shed, Redman House Program Centre and Conservation Building only. Other historic buildings on the site are not tracked by the City as capital assets. - 129 - 57 | Page Facility Name: Pickering Soccer Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 2% 0.12 0.117 0.014 Major Structural Repair Timelines Low 1 0.165 0.165 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.034 0.103 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Accessibility Low 1 0.044 0.044 Financial Moderate 3 0.100 0.299 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Moderate 3 0.063 0.189 Service Priority Moderate 3 0.074 0.222 Adaptability Moderate 3 0.047 0.142 Total Score 1.91 Rank 23 - 130 - 58 | Page Facility Name: West Shore Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 36% 2.16 0.117 0.252 Major Structural Repair Timelines Low 1 0.165 0.165 Proximate Hazard High 5 0.031 0.153 Site Servicing Reliability Low 1 0.021 0.021 Existing Utilization Moderate 3 0.034 0.103 Safety & Inclusivity Moderate 3 0.022 0.066 Accessibility Moderate 3 0.044 0.131 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density Low 1 0.022 0.022 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 2.02 Rank 22 - 131 - 59 | Page Facility Name: Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 115% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard Low 1 0.031 0.031 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 3.05 Rank 16 - 132 - 60 | Page Facility Name: Whitevale Community Centre Attribute Value Score Weight Attribute Total FCI Score 76% 5 0.117 0.583 Major Structural Repair Timelines Moderate 3 0.165 0.496 Proximate Hazard Moderate 3 0.031 0.092 Site Servicing Reliability High 5 0.021 0.104 Existing Utilization High 5 0.034 0.171 Safety & Inclusivity High 5 0.022 0.110 Accessibility High 5 0.044 0.218 Financial Low 5 0.100 0.498 Operational Low 1 0.099 0.099 Emergency Response Low 1 0.146 0.146 Service Density High 5 0.022 0.109 Complexity of Ecosystem Low 1 0.016 0.016 Service Substitutes Low 1 0.063 0.063 Service Priority Low 1 0.074 0.074 Adaptability Low 1 0.047 0.047 Total Score 3.11 Rank 14 - 133 - 61 | Page Appendix 4: Financial Analysis for Disposal of "Test Facility" Name: Test Facility Type: Multi-purpose Community Center Location: Central Pickering Size: 12,000 sq. ft. Age: 25 years Current Use: Hosts community gatherings, educational programs, and recreational activities. Step 1: Commercial Appraisal for Market Value Appraisal Objective: To ascertain the market value of Test Facility based on its highest and best use. Appraisal Methodology: Comparative market analysis, income capitalization approach, and cost approach. Appraisal Results: Value as Community Center: $2.5 million, based on current use and income generation. Value for Alternative Uses: $4 million as a mixed-use commercial property, considering location and zoning potential. Conclusion: The property's highest and best use is for commercial development, offering a significantly higher market value compared to its current function. Step 2: Operating Costs Analysis Annual Fixed Costs: Maintenance ($75,000), Staffing ($100,000), Utilities ($25,000). Variable Costs: Event-specific expenses, averaging $50,000 annually. Projected Capital Expenditure: Anticipated major renovations and upgrades of $600,000 over the next 5 years. Total 5-Year Operational Cost: Estimated at $1.75 million, including capital expenditure. Step 3: Revenue and Utilization Analysis Annual Revenue: Generated from facility rentals, program fees, and grants - averaging $180,000. Utilization Rates: 70% average occupancy with peak usage during evenings and weekends. Net Operating Income: Fluctuating, with recent years showing a decrease, current average annual net loss of $70,000. - 134 - 62 | Page 5-Year Revenue Projection: Assuming stable conditions, estimated total revenue of $900,000. Step 4: Financial Projection upon Disposal Potential Sale Price: Based on the appraisal, $4 million. Debt and Liabilities Settlement: Outstanding debts and liabilities amounting to $500,000. Net Proceeds from Sale: Estimated at $3.5 million after settling debts. Step 5: Opportunity Cost and Community Impact Analysis Opportunity Cost: Loss of potential revenue and community benefits from alternative higher-value commercial use. Community Impact: Assessment of the social and cultural value the Test Facility provides versus the potential benefits of commercial development, such as job creation and increased commercial activity. Step 6: Strategic and Environmental Considerations Alignment with City’s Goals: Examining how the disposal aligns with Pickering’s long-term urban development and community service goals. Environmental Impact: Considering the environmental implications of continuing current operations versus redevelopment. Conclusion: The financial analysis suggests that disposing of the Test Facility could be advantageous from a purely economic standpoint, given the higher market value for commercial use. However, the decision should also consider the potential loss of community services, the facility's current social value, and how well the disposal aligns with the city’s strategic goals. The analysis indicates a need for a balanced approach, weighing financial benefits against community and strategic impacts. - 135 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 03-24 Date: January 22, 2024 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services -RFP-2023-22-File: D-1220-007 Recommendation: 1.That proposal for Request for Proposal No. RFP-2023-22, submitted by John G. Williams Limited, Architect, to undertake Urban Design Review Services for three years commencing February 1, 2024, and expiring December 31, 2026 be accepted; and 2.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take such actionsas necessary to give effect to this report. Executive Summary: This report seeks to obtain Council’s approval to hire a Consultant, who will undertake Urban Design Review Services for a period of three years. Council authorized the implementation of the Urban Design Review Services Program in March 2014, aiming to elevate architectural and urban design standards in development projects. The existing purchase order with John G. Williams expired on December 31, 2023. Given the anticipated growth and change in Pickering, particularly in identified strategic areas, the City recognizes the need to maintain high standards in architecture and urban design. To address these challenges, RFP-2023-22 was issued on the City’s Bids and Tenders portal on November 1, 2023. Eleven proposals were submitted. The Evaluation Committee, comprising three staff from City Development, reviewed and evaluated the proposals received using criteria outlined in the bid document. The Evaluation Committee recommends that John G. Williams as the top-ranked Proponent, be retained to undertake Urban Design Review Services commencing February 1, 2024, and concluding on December 31, 2026. John G. Williams Limited is a multi-disciplinary firm specializing in planning, urban design, and architectural control with extensive experience in similar projects across various municipalities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). The firm's solution-oriented approach aligns with the City's goals, fostering collaboration to enhance planning, urban design, and architecture. - 136 - PLN 03-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services Page 2 Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: There are no financial impacts to the City as a result of retaining the services of the consultant for the Urban Design Review Services Program. The Pickering Official Plan and the User Fee By-law include provisions requiring an applicant to be responsible for the cost of the City peer reviewing studies and drawings including site plan and architectural drawings. The 2024 budget for the Planning & Design section of the City Development identifies an expenditure line item for Urban Design Review Services in the amount of $60,000.00 (Account Code 10105.502230.4635) and a corresponding cost recovery line item (Account Code 10105.406540.0000). Discussion: 1. Background In March 2014, Council authorized the implementation of an Urban Design Review Services Program, which has successfully raised the standard of architecture and urban design on most development projects. John G. Williams has provided valuable comments and advice regarding the design and layout of site plans, and enhancing the exterior appearance of new development through the review of material selection and utilizing current architectural trends to improve the overall finish and quality of the projects. The existing purchase order issued to John G. Williams to provide Urban Design Review Services expired on December 31, 2023. To continue to help achieve and uphold new and higher standards for exterior appearance and design of buildings, the City would strongly benefit from the continued services of a qualified Urban Design Consultant to provide objective and professional advice on architecture and urban design. 2. Need for Urban Design Review Services Urban design is about creating sustainable neighbourhoods and places through greater attention to the aesthetic and functional relationships that exist between public and private spaces. Well-designed buildings contribute to creating a high-quality urban realm and instill a positive community design image, which contributes to the City as an attractive place to live and work. Pickering is expecting to experience significant growth and change, which will bring about new opportunities as well as challenges for the growth and development of the City. In addition to traditional greenfield development, the City is also transitioning towards higher-density mixed-use development/redevelopment within the City’s City Centre and along corridors such as Kingston Road and Brock Road. - 137 - PLN 03-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services Page 3 The City Centre and the Kingston Corridor/Brock Node Intensification Area are identified as Strategic Growth Areas, and the City Centre is further identified as an Urban Growth Centre by A Place to Grow: Growth for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (the Growth Plan). It is expected that these areas will result in vibrant mixed-use communities that reflect compact, transit-oriented development. As the City continues to grow through the introduction of new developments and the redevelopment of existing buildings and properties, it will be necessary to continue to establish higher standards for architecture and urban design. To help achieve and uphold these standards, the City requires the services of an Urban Design Consultant to provide objective and professional advice on matters relating to architecture and urban design. Through the review of development proposals, the Urban Design consultant will: • establish a positive visual image for built form and urban design within the City; • promote harmonious and attractive developments through attention to site planning place-making and the exterior architectural quality and appearance of new development; • encourage built form which results in safe, active and pedestrian-friendly communities; • encourage a variety of attractive, innovative and environmentally sustainable building designs which combine the best of contemporary and traditional architectural design principles; and • ensure new buildings enhance existing communities and neighbourhoods and further the development of a distinctive urban identity for the City. 3. Changes to Site Plan Control through Bill 23 The enactment of Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, made several changes to the Planning Act. Some of those changes include removing exterior design, landscape and streetscape design from the Site Plan Control process. Detailed urban design review at the municipal level is vital in delivering safe, healthy, and sustainable communities, while enhancing the quality of the public realm. It also ensures the proposal addresses several functional requirements for future residents, encompassing considerations such as grading, pedestrian access and connectivity, landscaping, utility locations, snow storage and accessibility. Lastly, the review ensures the proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in approved urban design guidelines and applicable official plan policies. These legislated changes could have substantial implications as they hinder the City from requiring fundamental design controls on aesthetics for buildings that are visible from public areas. While the City navigates the new changes to the Planning Act, at this time, staff will continue to work with applicants to provide urban design-related comments ensuring new proposals achieve the City’s urban design objectives through the review of site-specific zoning by-law amendments and continue to work with applicants to address architectural and urban design-related matters through site plan review. - 138 - PLN 03-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services Page 4 4. Request for Proposal RFP-2023-22 was issued on the City’s Bids and Tenders portal on November 1, 2023, with a submission deadline of November 22, 2023. Eleven proposals were submitted. The Evaluation Committee, consisting of three staff from City Development reviewed and evaluated the proposals received, using the criteria outlined in the bid document. Proposals were evaluated and ranked based on the consultant’s experience on similar projects, their understanding of the project, proposed work plan and deliverables, project team overview, and their pricing. John G. Williams was the top-ranked Proponent and is recommended for the award. All pre-conditions of the award, as identified in the bid document, have been received, reviewed, and approved. John G. Williams Limited, is a multi-disciplinary firm specializing in planning, urban design and architectural design control. This firm is one of the few that is active as an Urban Design/Control Architect Consultant in many municipalities within the GTA, including Brampton, Markham, Mississauga, Hamilton, Oakville, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, and Whitby. They have extensive experience reviewing a variety of built forms including mixed-use developments, medium and high-density residential projects, as well as commercial and industrial buildings. The firm employs a solution-oriented approach to development projects and will work collaboratively with planning staff to continue to raise the level of planning, urban design and architecture within the City, while balancing the City’s goals against the applicant’s requirements. Upon careful examination of all proposals and relevant documents received in response to RFP-2023-22, the Evaluation Committee recommends acceptance of the Proposal submitted by John G. Williams, to undertake Urban Design Review Services for three years commencing February 1, 2024, and expiring December 31, 2026, be accepted. Attachments: None - 139 - PLN 03-24 January 22, 2024 Subject: Consulting Services for Urban Design Review Services Page 5 Prepared By: Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Division Head, Development Review & Urban Design Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Manager, Procurement Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Original Signed By Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer NS:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 140 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk January 17, 2024 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law -Owner: Lebovic Enterprises Limited- Blocks 69 to 74, Plan 40M-2664 File: PLC.40M-2664 Blocks 69 to 74, Plan 40M-2664 are being developed in accordance with the appropriate Subdivision Agreement in such a manner to allow for the construction of 34 townhouse dwelling units. On January 24, 2022, Council passed By-law 7904/22, enactment of which exempted the subject lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. We have been advised that, due to a delay in the Owner’s construction schedule, some of the townhouse dwelling units will not be completed and ready for private conveyance by the expiry date set out in By-law 7904/22 (January 24, 2024). Accordingly, a further by-law should be enacted, extending the expiry date to June 22, 2025. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law, enactment of which will exempt these lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. This draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for January 22, 2024. PB:ca Attachments Location Map Draft By-law -C~of- PlCKERlNG - 141 - Cameo Street Belcourt Street Skyridge Boule v a r d Bu r k h o l d e r D r i v e Marathon Avenue Ke y s t o n e M e w s An g o r a S t r e e t Dragonfly Avenue 1:2,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Property Owner:Property Description: Part Lot Control THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Jan. 15, 2024 ¯ Lebovic Enterprises Ltd. Blocks 69 to 74, 40M-2664 L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\A\2021\A 02-21 - Highcastle Inc\PartLotControl_40M2664_Blk69to74.mxd Blocks 69-7440M-2664 E -~l>f- PlCKERlNG - 142 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8075/24 Being a by-law to exempt Blocks 69 to 74, Plan 40M-2664, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. Whereas pursuant to the provisions of section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that section 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended shallcease to apply to Blocks 69 to 74, Plan 40M-2664. 2.This by-law shall remain in force and effect for a period of seventeen months from the date of the passing of this by-law and shall expire on June 22, 2025. By-law passed this 22nd day of January, 2024 ___________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ___________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 143 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk January 17, 2024 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law -Owner: Mattamy (Seaton) Limited – Phase 2-Block 117, Plan 40M-2632 File: PLC.40M-2632.7 Block 117, Plan 40M-2632 is being developed in accordance with the appropriate Subdivision Agreement in such a manner to allow for the construction of 7 townhouse dwelling units. On February 27, 2023, Council passed By-law 7993/23, enactment of which exempted the subject lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. We have been advised that, due to a delay in the Owner’s construction schedule, some of the townhouse dwelling units will not be completed and ready for private conveyance by the expiry date set out in By-law 7993/23 (February 27, 2024). Accordingly, a further by-law should be enacted, extending the expiry date to January 22, 2025. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law, enactment of which will exempt these lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. This draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for January 22, 2024. PB:ca Attachments Location Map Draft By-law -C~of- PlCKERlNG - 144 - Bu r k h o l d e r D r i v e Cameo Street Belcourt Stree t Dragonfly Av e n u e To f f e e S t r e e t Sa p p h i r e D r i v e ClipperLane Silk Street DashwoodCourt Bu r k h o l d e r Dr i v e ReflectionPlace Fa l l H a r v e s t C r e s c e n t O r e n d a S t r e e t Skyridge Boulevard Ke y s t o n e M e w s Taunton Road Fo x t a i l C r e s c e n t Orenda Street Elm c r e e k M e w s Ha l l o w O a k M e w s Skyridge Blvd Marathon Ave Cameo St Block 83 Block 84 Block 85 Block 86 Block87 Block 88 Block 89 Block 90 Block 91 Block 92 Block 93 Block94 Block95 Block96 Block 97 Block 98 Block 99Block 100 Block101 Block 102 Block103 Block 106 Block 105 Block 104 Block 116 Block 117 Block 178 Block 177 1:2,695 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: Mattamy Seaton Limited Part Lot Control Mattamy Seaton Limited Phase 2 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Apr. 15, 2019 Legend Proposed Roads Subject Lands Blocks 83 to 106, 116, 117, 177 and 178 Plan 40M-2632 -04ri- P1CKER1NG --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ------ --- --- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ - 145 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8076/24 Being a by-law to exempt Block 117, Plan 40M- 2632, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. Whereas pursuant to the provisions of section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that section 50(5) ofthe Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended shall ceaseto apply to Block 117, Plan 40M-2632. 2.This by-law shall remain in force and effect for a period of one year from the date of thepassing of this by-law and shall expire on January 22, 2025. By-law passed this 22nd day of January, 2024 ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 146 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk January 17, 2024 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law -Owner: 1133373 Ontario Inc.-Lots 24 to 26, 29, 36 to 44, 47 to 51, 59 to 62, 65, 68 to 70, 73 to 75, 80 to 82, 84, 90 to 92, 94 to 100, 104 to 106 and 128 and Blocks 159, 162, 163, 164, 175, 180, 181, 183 and 185, Plan 40M-2671File: PLC.40M-2671.14 Lots 24 to 26, 29, 36 to 44, 47 to 51, 59 to 62, 65, 68 to 70, 73 to 75, 80 to 82, 84, 90 to 92, 94 to 100, 104 to 106 and 128 and Blocks 159, 162, 163, 164, 175, 180, 181, 183 and 185, Plan 40M-2671 are being developed in accordance with the appropriate Subdivision Agreement in such a manner to allow for the construction of 94 semi-detached and 46 townhouse dwelling units. On February 28, 2022, Council passed By-law 7911/22, enactment of which exempted the subject lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. We have been advised that, due to a delay in the Owner’s construction schedule, some of the dwelling units will not be completed and ready for private conveyance by the expiry date set out in By-law 7911/22 (February 28, 2024). Accordingly, a further by-law should be enacted, extending the expiry date to June 22, 2025. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law, enactment of which will exempt these lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. This draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for January 22, 2024. PB:ca Attachments Location Map Draft By-law -C~of- PlCKERlNG - 147 - Block181 Block180 Block179 Block178 Block177Block186 Block185 Block184 Block183 Block182 Block 158 Block176 Block175 Block174 Block173 Block172 Block171 Block170 Block169 Block168 Block167 Block166 Block165 Block154 Block155 Block160 Block 161 Block 162 Block 163 Block159 Block 164 Lot24 Lot25 Lot26 Lot29 Lot 36 Lot 37 Lot 38 Lot 39 Lot 40 Lot 41 Lot 42 Lot 43 Lot 44 Lot 47 Lot 48 Lot 49 Lot 50 Lot 51Lot 59 Lot 60 Lot 61 Lot 62 Lot 65 Lot 68 Lot 69 Lot 70 Lot 73 Lot 74 Lot 75 Lot 80 Lot 81 Lot 82 Lot 84 Lot 90 Lot 91 Lot 92 Lot94 Lot95 Lot96 Lot97 Lot98 Lot99 Lot100 Lot104 Lot105 Lot106 Lo t 1 2 8 Block 157 Block156 Burk h o l d e r D r i v e Hi b i s c u s D r i v e EganMews Cact u s C r e s c e n t De l p h i n i u m T r a i l Azalea Avenue Dr a w s t r i n g La n e Skyridge Boulevar d Marathon Avenue Chateau Court Cari n a T e r r a c e Came o S t r e e t Citri n e S t r e e t An g o r a S t r e e t Aquarius Tra i l Ceri s e M a n o r At h e n a P a t h Sp i n d l e M e w s Ap r i c o t L a n e So l s t i c e M e w s Pe t e r M a t t h e w s D r i v e Cactus Crescent 1:3,500 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: Subdivision Assumption 40M-2671 1133373 Ontario Inc. Lots 24-26, 29, 36-44, 47-51, 59-62, 65, 68-70, 73-75, 80-82, THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Feb. 10, 2022 L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\Legal\SubdivisionCompletion\SubCompletion_40M2671.mxd 84, 90-92, 94-100, 104-106 &128, & Blocks 154-186, Plan 40M-2671 -G4;0f- PICKERING I - 148 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8077/24 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 24 to 26, 29, 36 to 44, 47 to 51, 59 to 62, 65, 68 to 70, 73 to 75, 80 to 82, 84, 90 to 92, 94 to 100, 104 to 106 and 128 and Blocks 159, 162, 163, 164, 175, 180, 181, 183 and 185 173, Plan 40M-2671, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act Whereas pursuant to the provisions of section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that section 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended shall ceaseto apply to Lots 24 to 26, 29, 36 to 44, 47 to 51, 59 to 62, 65, 68 to 70, 73 to 75, 80 to 82, 84, 90 to 92, 94 to 100, 104 to 106 and 128 and Blocks 159, 162, 163, 164, 175, 180, 181, 183 and 185 173, Plan 40M-2671. 2.This by-law shall remain in force and effect for a period of seventeen months from thedate of the passing of this by-law and shall expire on June 22, 2025. By-law passed this 22nd day of January, 2024. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 149 -